Slashdot Mirror


Iran Claims To Have Downed Another US Drone

AmiMoJo writes "The Iranian military says it has captured an unmanned U.S. drone aircraft in its airspace over Gulf waters. The Revolutionary Guards said they had brought down a ScanEagle — one of the smaller, less sophisticated drones employed by the Americans. The U.S. said it was looking into the reports." (The U.S. response so far, also reported by Reuters and others, seems to be "We're not missing any drones.")

219 comments

  1. But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Revolutionary Guards said they had brought down a ScanEagle

    But the movie "Argo" taught me that Iranian Revolutionary Guards are just bumbling idiots who can't tell their heads from their asses in several completely fabricated scenes! Larry, Moe and Curly have more wherewithal than the Revolutionary Guard! No way they could outsmart American engineering!

    1. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by singingjim1 · · Score: 2

      North Korea found a Unicorn Lair. Iran isn't too far removed from N Korea in the "truth in journalism" arena. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but pics or it didn't.

    2. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "US isn't too far removed from N Korea in the "truth in journalism" arena."

      FIFY, Citizen.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by localman57 · · Score: 2

      North Korea found a Unicorn Lair. Iran isn't too far removed from N Korea in the "truth in journalism" arena. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but pics or it didn't.

      Gawker has a picture.

      Personally, I think it looks photoshopped, but opinions may vary.

    4. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, "Argo" gave the Guards more credit than they deserved. The movie threw in a lot of fictional Hollywood bullshit to make it look like the diplomats escaped with seconds to spare, with the Guards hot on their tails. In real life, the Guards were completely oblivious - they had no idea it happened until they saw it on TV.

    5. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, please. The US may lie in the press, but it's nothing compared to what North Korea does. Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House and a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine. There's no comparison.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    6. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2

      Right, except that last time this happened Iran was telling the truth (well, part of it at least) and the US was lying.

    7. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House ..."

      It was -a- white house in Nigeria.

    8. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born... a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine.

      I dunno, Glenn Beck does still have a radio show.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    9. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by TheP4st · · Score: 1

      Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House and a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine.

      Stop being silly. Chuck Norris don't have cold shivers he give the media cold shivers

      --
      "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
    10. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by dugancent · · Score: 2

      Glen Beck isn't media, he is entertainment. Same as Limbaugh.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    11. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I read, they reportedly found a sign that said "Unicorn lair" (assuming they've correctly translated, and/or catered for linguistic drift over the centuries since). It doesn't mean there were ever actual unicorns thereabouts. Could've been a stuffed narwhal maybe?

    12. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by deathlyslow · · Score: 1
      --
      Don't blame me for redundant posts. I can't type very fast. Hence the user ID.
    13. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Glen Beck isn't media, he is entertainment. Same as Limbaugh.

      Good luck convincing their audiences of that.

      Audiences which include some highly influential people...

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    14. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 0

      What a shitty Rah Rah Rah USA #1 movie

      No argument there.

    15. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And he's no true scotsman, too right?

      Good work citizen! All our statements are true except for the lies!

    16. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by singingjim1 · · Score: 1

      Funny. Stupid post, but funny.

    17. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, "Obviously photoshopped pics, or it didn't happen", Iran!

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    18. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by s13g3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No... there's a lighthouse in the middle of Prussia. A white house in a, Red Square.

      I'm living in films for the sake of Russia, a kino runner for the DDR, and the 52 daughters of the Revolution turn gold to chrome.

      But seriously, lyrics to old goth songs notwithstanding... I know a lot of my fellow Americans are naive about a lot of things, but comparing our media, bad as it is, to China or Russia's, much less to North Korea's, of all places, is at best naive in the extreme, and a good sign someone has been drinking kool-aid they shouldn't be.

      --
      "Inveniemus Viam Aut Faciemus" 'We will find a way... Or we will make one!' --Hannibal of Carthage
    19. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, please. The US may lie in the press, but it's nothing compared to what North Korea does. Our media doesn't say shit like ...

      Decades ago, when I was a kid, the US press printed similar outrageous statements about China. Then I grew up, I learned how to read and write Chinese, and I lived in China for several years. Out of curiosity, I went back and read some of those reports in the original Chinese. What they actually said was NOT what the US press reported, but instead was the use of metaphor or some idiom like "raining cats and dogs" that was never supposed to be taken literally. The US press was twisting the meaning of the words to intentionally make the Chinese look stupid.

      I do not speak or understand Korean, but I strongly suspect that that same thing is happening. So your example of the Koreans lying is probably really an example of the USA lying about what the Koreans are really saying.

    20. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by dywolf · · Score: 0

      you mean the supposed RQ drone?
      that was unpainted?
      only had the top surface visible?
      and showed no signs of any damage or use? (pristine shiny skin with no blemishes that all aircraft develop even after only a single flight, even if its just from insect splatter)

      that basically looked like a mockup constructed from shiny plastic?

      you mean that one?

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    21. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      The difference?

      US is BETTER at it. The art of subtlety - lying through context, false assumption and obfuscation.

      If you want a good view of the situation, read Glen Greenwald over a period of time, and follow FAIR's "On The Media".

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    22. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 0

      No, but they do say 19 Saudis with box-cutters framed themselves into hijacking airliners and flew them into airplane-collision-proof buildings. One of them survived. And that the department of defense couldn't imagine this happening, when everyone else have been wondering for years why this scenario hadn't been played yet. And stuff.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    23. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by oodaloop · · Score: 0

      Or maybe your personal experiences are blinding you to what is going on in a completely different country. I work in the intelligence community, and I can assure you that the state media does in fact put out ridiculous things and is reported by multiple independent sources.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    24. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      I've actually read several books from Norman Soloman, Noam Chomsky, and others about the media in the US. No doubt the US lies. I was just pointing out it's not in the same league as North Korea in the seer audacity and unbelievabality.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    25. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by chill · · Score: 1

      If nothing else happens other than he doesn't appear in a kilt, I am grateful.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    26. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Seeteufel · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Of course. Still the North Korean regime is outrageous. What you find stunning are the American double standards: The President publicly admits that they have a Killer drone program to assasinate persons in third countries (without permission of the third country). That would be clear case of state terrorism and I would expect the President to be taken to the International Court of Justice as a killer or at least into custody. But he doesn't even have to resign. There are no consequences. They are very public about that. No shame, no doubts. Where is the institutional resistance? Absent.

      Now, the longer perspective is that this is peanuts compared to the bombine and human suffering in past (undeclared) wars. Probably it would not even be possible anymore to imagine a war in the proportions of Vietnam these days. Targeted drone killings sound more humane than Dresden and Hiroshima. Those who carry the crimes out say it was an order. And when someone bombs their base he becomes a "terrorist". That is the whole hypocrisy. So maybe the standards and principles are wrong, not the practise.

    27. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      You know, it's odd that when Saudis were involved in 9/11 everyone jumped tot he conclusion that Saudi Arabia must be involved. But when 2 Iraqis were involved with the '93 World Trade Center attack, I don't hear the same claims that Iraq must have been involved. Weird, right? Then when Iraq was tied to the '94 Bojinka plot, the '95 OKC Bombing, and the '98 Embassy attacks, it was just of series of weird coincidences.

      BTW, the World Trade Center was built to withstand direct collisions with the largest plane built at the time, I believe the 717. 30 years later, planes were much bigger.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    28. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by davydagger · · Score: 1

      Actually, despite how bad the mainstream American press is, they are still pretty far removed from Iran, NK, China and Russia, in "Truth in journalism"

    29. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have Fox News and the national enquirer and people who believe in both of them!

    30. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by davydagger · · Score: 1

      of course.

      It still bears no weight on the original argument.

    31. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Seeteufel · · Score: 1

      You mean history lessons from Hollywood?

    32. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Or maybe your personal experiences are blinding you to what is going on in a completely different country.

      Or maybe I chose to believe my own eyes instead of believing what I am told I am supposed to believe.

      I work in the intelligence community, and I can assure you that the state media ...

      Why would I need "assurance" from the "intelligence community" about something that was openly published in the press?

    33. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should seriously check yourself in to an institution. Honestly, if you were serious, you are completely disassociated from reality.

    34. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by gtall · · Score: 1

      See MSNBC.

    35. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      I was just pointing out it's not in the same league as North Korea in the sheer audacity and unbelievabality.

      From a game theory perspective, I'm better off if I'm being lied to by somebody who's unbelievable. In many ways, a huge, obviously false, lie is less audacious than a superficially believable one.

      Then again, when Stockholm Syndrome is in play, huge bold lies like "Social Security and Medicare will be there for the next generation" or "the War on Drugs is keeping Americans safe" are believed anyway, despite the simple arithmetic disproof.

      And they say that North Koreans are brainwashed about their "Dear Leader"...

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    36. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually they modeled a 727, it was designed to withstand *Multiple* 727 impacts.

      The core would not fall even if the floors pancaked, unless cut.

    37. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Uncharitable translations are a staple of demagoguery. What surprises me is how much it still happens in the age of the global Internet.

    38. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But seriously, lyrics to old goth songs notwithstanding...

      If Andrew Eldritch sees that you referred to the Sisters of Mercy as "goth," he's going to pout (because he's ridiculous that way).

    39. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by davydagger · · Score: 1

      oh yeah that too.

    40. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BTW, the World Trade Center was built to withstand direct collisions with the largest plane built at the time, I believe the 717. 30 years later, planes were much bigger.

      The WTC withstood the collisions like a champ. But then, y'know... fire, jet fuel, etc.

    41. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points for the pair of you.
      Now if you'll excuse me, I have to stand very still and lean from side to side a tiny bit in a dark room with loud music.

    42. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BTW, the World Trade Center was built to withstand direct collisions with the largest plane built at the time, I believe the 717. 30 years later, planes were much bigger.

      Also full of the newer version of the chemicals that cause contrails.

    43. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He's talking about the RQ-170 that US president Barack Obama OFFICIALLY ASKED BACK, being ridiculed worldwide as a result. A drone that includes the most cutting-edge reconnaissance and stealth technologies that even Russia and China don't have yet, and that now Iran has instead. And losing it on enemy land was the most stupid thing that some so called "american heroes" could do:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93US_RQ-170_incident

    44. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

      Wrong.

      Those people know they get nothing but lies.

      The US? Doesn't suspect a thing.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    45. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      Wait just a second. If his listeners are sheep, and he shows up wearing a kilt, you know about those jokes; man I'm just going to stop right here.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    46. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, please. The US may lie in the press, but it's nothing compared to what North Korea does. Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House and a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine. There's no comparison.

      getting close to it though... jamie fox just announced "our lord and saviour, barack obama" ... what better liars than hollywood media?? north korea, your media have competition from the best in the world now!!!

    47. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Chuck Norris doesn't have cold shivers

      Sure he does. Remember the earthquake last year in Japan?

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    48. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by wmac1 · · Score: 1
    49. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      The guards build Iranian long range missiles, satellite carrier, attack helicopters, anti-ship cruise missiles and many more nowadays (check Wikipedia yourself).

      You can ridicule them as much as you want but that won't change anything. Not that I like them but even that won't change anything.

    50. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by cusco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A Soviet general in the '70s told Farley Mowat (paraphrased), "The difference between our propaganda and yours is that we don't believe ours."

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    51. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      No high rise structure ever built could survive the collapse of an entire floor (they might survive the roof collapsing into the structure but even that could cause a domino failure). Logic should get in the way of you even uttering that moronic statement. You put a building in motion like that and NOTHING in the world could stop it. The WTC were billions of pounds of steel and concrete and you are suggesting that it could survive a fall of about 12' and an instantaneous stop. The force transfer of that instantaneous stop of several billions pounds falling at the acceleration of gravity for 12' would be so large that no material on earth could stop it.

      Don't believe me? The mass of the WTC is public, take half the building mass (impact was mid-building), assume a commercial loading (all the cubicles and office equipment) of about 100lb/sf) and add that in, run it through gravitational acceleration for 12' (a commercial structure is probably closer to 15). Then try to find a material that could withstand that force needed to stop that motion.

      I swear to god people don't have an ounce of common sense or knowledge of physics when it comes to conspiracy theories.

    52. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by mbkennel · · Score: 1

      Correct. The US officials rarely actually lie. They do misdirect when necessary. Note the response in this case:

      Iran: We have a U.S. drone
      U.S: The *U.S. Navy* (which is known to fly drones nearby) is not missing any drones.

      Well, what about CIA, NRO, or NGIA? They don't say anything.

      And besides, even CIA could reply "We're not missing any of our drones." And could be entirely true. And that's because a private subcontractor owns and runs them for CIA.

    53. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you have drunk the best koolaid of all, as they have you hook line and sinker. How about you explain about all the depleted uranium charges used in Iraq? Can you talk about the Hiroshima liek symptoms being displayed by a great number of Iraqi's? Heard any of these stories in your non-biased western media?

      No you haven't , now go back to being the good little drone and thinking you are better off, and living in a free society.

    54. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing which tied them to Iraq was the CIA contact who was directing all of their efforts.

    55. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by lennier · · Score: 2

      I work in the intelligence community, and I can assure you that...

      "Trust me - I'm a professional liar."

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    56. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we've heard but WE DON'T CARE!

    57. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't say that too loudly, they might take it as a challenge...

    58. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In what sense is "media" different from "entertainment"? I don't know about you, but millions of people watch "The Big Bang Theory" on their TVs. The same TVs that also show Glenn Beck and Jon Stewart and whatever passes for "news" in their household.

    59. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      But we're never gonna survive, unless
      We get a little crazy

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    60. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

      I am quoting (below) from the link you provided; I have added italics to indicate the quoted text and boldface to emphasize some of it.

      One may wonder: where did this false interpretation originate? Who is responsible for the translation that has sparked such worldwide controversy? The answer is surprising.

      The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran's Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.

      And a little further down in the article:

      The inconsistency of the IRNA's translation should be evidence enough of the unreliability of the source, particularly when transcribing their news from Farsi into the English language.

      So we have The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm providing an "unreliable" translation of Ahmadinejad's quote of a statement formerly made by Khomeini. Right.

      And we are to therefore conclude that "western media" is at fault for reporting this translated text to the rest of the world? Right.

      Therefore I conclude:

      In Iran we don't have unreliable translations like in your country. :-)

    61. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was because he let one rip on the toilet.

    62. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      That would be the one, yes.

      Are you implying that the US was lying when they admitted losing it? Meta-conspiracy... I like it.

    63. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is well known that the audiences of the Daily Show and Colbert Report entertainment shows on the Comedy channel do very well on polls of public knowledge. What is less appreciated is that those two shows have some unexpected competition.

      Pew Research Center - Key News Audiences Now Blend Online and Traditional Sources
      Data from table: Education, Age, and Knowledge (Near bottom of page.)

      High
      Knowledge / Source

      44% - NPR
      43% - Hardball
      42% - Hannity & Colmes
      36% - Rush Limbaugh

      34% - BBC
      34% - Colbert Report
      33% - NewsHour
      30% - Daily Show
      22% - Daily newspaper
      21% - NBC News
      19% - CNN
      19% - ABC news
      19% - Fox News
      18% - National Average
      17% - Local TV news
      10% - CBS News

      I have to admit to a bit of surprise that the Colbert Report audience outscored the Daily Show audience, but there it is.

      (Queue down mods by the "open minded" for this bit of sacrilege.)

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    64. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      . . .The art of subtlety - lying through context, false assumption and obfuscation.

      If you want a good view of the situation, read Glen Greenwald over a period of time, . . .

      Surprisingly I pretty much agree with you. That does seem to be a good summary of Greenward. In fairness though, I think Greenwald actually believes much of what he writes. The problem comes from his fringe politics resulting in extreme positions and nonsense. In many cases you will end up closer to the truth to assume his position, or yours for that matter, is backwards and start from there. ;)

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    65. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      During the Cold War, factual reports of typical American life did seem like propaganda to the Soviets. The gap in what American society provided versus what Soviet society provided, even to the fairly privileged, and at least into the mid 1970s, was rather startling. A Mig-25 pilot by the name of Victor Belenko defected to the United States in 1975 by flying his plane to Japan. His story is told in the book, "Mig Pilot.*" Reading of his experiences encountering American society is eye opening. His ultimate evaluation of American society then was that it had basically achieved in terms of economics and social services what the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had been promising would arrive under "true Communism" that was always 5-10 years away. His encounter with an ordinary supermarket is instructive. He thought it was a special showplace to fool visitors about the wealth of American society, a Potemkin village, as it were. You can read the an account of it in this selection from Mig Pilot, or the more muted account from an interview:

      Belenko: First of all American super-market, my first visit was under CIA supervision, and I thought it was set-up; I did not believe super-market was real one. I thought well I was unusual guest; they probably kicked everyone out. It's such a nice, big place with incredible amount of produce, and no long lines! You're accustomed to long lines in Russia. But later, when I discovered super-market was real one, I had real fun exploring new products. I would buy, everyday, a new thing and try to figure out its function. In Russia at that time (and even today) it's hard to find canned food, good one. But everyday I would buy new cans with different food. Once I bought a can which said "dinner." I cooked it with potatoes, onions, and garlic-it was delicious. Next morning my friends ask me, "Viktor, did you buy a cat?" It was a can of chicken-based cat food. But it was delicious! It was better than canned food for people in Russia today. And I did test it. Last year I brought four people from Russia for commercial project, and I set them up. I bought nibble sized human food. I installed a pâté, and it was cat food. I put it on crackers. And they did consume it, and they liked it. So the taste has not changed. By the way, for those who are not familiar with American cat food. It's very safe; it's delicious, and sometimes it's better than human food, because of the Humane Society. -- Viktor BELENKO

      The Communist party made a concerted effort at internal propaganda to shape the thoughts and behaviors of the Soviet people. They often distorted or outright lied about conditions in the US and the West, as well as exaggerated the accomplishments and performance of Soviet society, including the economy. It was these very exaggerations that prompted cynicism among the people. But even with that cynicism, the natural reaction for many of them was to act in accordance to some degree with the information they were given in propaganda.

      Propaganda in the Soviet Union

      Communist propaganda in the Soviet Union was extensively based on the Marxism-Leninism ideology to promote the Communist Party line. In societies with pervasive censorship, the propaganda was omnipresent and very efficient. It penetrated even social

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    66. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by plover · · Score: 1

      If you want more interesting confirmation, take a look at the books written by Christopher Andrew from Vasily Mitrokhin's notes. Mitrokhin was a senior archivist for the KGB during a significant span of the Cold War, and one of his jobs was to destroy old case notes of KGB activities. He was troubled that these significant activities should be lost to history, so he made handwritten copies of many of the intelligence activities the KGB undertook. After the fall of the Iron Curtain, he drove his collection of notes over the border and delivered them to the British Consulate.

      The absolutely stunning thing about his notes is that they reinforce almost everything the U.S. government had told us was Soviet lies and propaganda. That includes really dirty stuff, like the pernicious rumors that "AIDS was a product of U.S. Army experiments in Fort Dietrich", which he reveals to be the product of an active KGB disinformation campaign that was part of a deliberate plan to embarrass the U.S. government. (That particular rumor was so cruel and useless that the KGB later tried to discredit it, but it still lives on in the minds of conspiracy theorists.)

      The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB is one of my favorite books.

      It's really cool to read the book and have direct confirmation from the USSR's own records that that the U.S. government and the CIA were not lying to us, and that these lies came straight from a KGB operation. This isn't the CIA whining "we didn't lie, please believe our records," this is direct evidence that the KGB created these lies.

      But does the U.S. lie to us? They certainly withhold a metric ton of facts on a daily basis, and undoubtedly there are some specific instances of individuals lying. But I don't think it happens on the vast scale that the conspiracy theorists would have us believe.

      --
      John
    67. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by singingjim1 · · Score: 1

      But regardless of the semantics of it all, there is a right side and a wrong side. Once can argue about the little fiddly bits of how right or how wrong, but boil it down to its least common denominator and you've got crazy people who would conspire to blow up innocent people because they don't like their way of life, and you've got the people who are trying to stop them one illegal, and usually on target and successful with little collateral damage, drone strike at a time. I sleep very well knowing I'm on the right side of this absolute stupidity.

    68. Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... by Seeteufel · · Score: 1

      The strange aspect is that we have approx 80% civilian casualties and 20% semi-combattant targets.

  2. I think the inter-agency conversation went like by HPHatecraft · · Score: 5, Funny

    CIA: [sounding official] Uh, everything's under control. Situation normal.
    Pentagon: What happened?
    CIA: [getting nervous] Uh, we had a slight weapons malfunction, but uh... everything's perfectly all right now. We're fine. We're all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
    Pentagon: We're sending a squad up.
    CIA: Uh, uh... negative, negative. We had a reactor leak here now. Give us a few minutes to lock it down. Large leak, very dangerous.
    Pentagon: Who is this? What's your operating number?
    CIA: Uh...

    1. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 0

      Well that certainly sheds new light on the "Aren't you a little short for a storm trooper?" line.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    2. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Funny

      That was after another conversation that went like this:

      Pentagon: What happen?
      CIA: Somebody shot down us the drone. We get signal.
      Pentagon: Main screen turn on. It's you!
      Ahmadinajad: How are you gentlemen? All your tech are belong to us! You are on the way to destruction.
      Pentagon: What you say?
      Ahmadinajad: You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha ha ha ha!
      Pentagon: Take off every MiG. We know what you're doing. Move MiG. For great justice!

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    3. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by khr · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      It was a boring conversation anyway...

    4. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Thankfully (or not?) this conversation doesn't end with the CIA jumping into a trash compactor.

    5. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was after another conversation that went like this:

      Pentagon: What happen?
      CIA: Somebody shot down us the drone. We get signal.
      Pentagon: Main screen turn on. It's you!
      Ahmadinajad: How are you gentlemen? All your tech are belong to us! You are on the way to destruction.
      Pentagon: What you say?
      Ahmadinajad: You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha ha ha ha!
      Pentagon: Take off every MiG. We know what you're doing. Move MiG. For great justice!

      English called

    6. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      Han should have shot the console first.

    7. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by NickGnome · · Score: 1

      I think it's a design problem.
      I guess you'll have to hammer those spikes later.

    8. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was after another conversation that went like this:

      Pentagon: What happen?
      CIA: Somebody shot down us the drone. We get signal.
      Pentagon: Main screen turn on. It's you!
      Ahmadinajad: How are you gentlemen? All your tech are belong to us! You are on the way to destruction.
      Pentagon: What you say?
      Ahmadinajad: You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha ha ha ha!
      Pentagon: Take off every MiG. We know what you're doing. Move MiG. For great justice!

      English called

      Seriously? This place is getting sad...

    9. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Star Wars reference you fucking faggot moderators. God damnit, this place is a sad, sad place to be. Slashdot needs to be taken off line. Too many stupid kids here as the smart generation has died off or moved on.

    10. Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was after another conversation that went like this: Pentagon: What happen? CIA: Somebody shot down us the drone. We get signal. Pentagon: Main screen turn on. It's you! Ahmadinajad: How are you gentlemen? All your tech are belong to us! You are on the way to destruction. Pentagon: What you say? Ahmadinajad: You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha ha ha ha! Pentagon: Take off every MiG. We know what you're doing. Move MiG. For great justice!

      English called

      Whooooooooosh

  3. Right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With rocket-powered unicorns from North Korea?

    Even if it's true, the drone they're talking about is a commercial product -- we sell it to any ally who wants one.

    1. Re:Right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check the map. Iran and N.Korea are 10,000 kilometers away from each other. This discussion is about Iran.

  4. I guess ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I guess Iran got another license for Photoshop?

    1. Re:I guess ... by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, the previous copy they bought is in use. They are busy wiping Israel off the map.

    2. Re:I guess ... by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      They probably just downloaded it using bittorrent. How do you think they got infected with StuxNet?

  5. Drones? by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the summary: "The U.S. response so far, also reported by Reuters and others, seems to be 'We're not missing any drones.'"

    How could any one entity tell? At this point there's the CIA, the FBI, the ATF, the NSA, the SS, the regular Army, the Army Rangers, the Navy, the Marines, the Seals, the Air Force, the Coast Guard, the State Department, the DoD, Mercenaries (ie "Civilian Contractors"), and Sheriff Joe Arpaio all with drones. Could any one entity speak for all of those at this point?

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Drones? by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Combined Air Operations Center. They'll know. One agency monitoring everything including, but not limited to, commercial airliners, military flights, private planes, U(C)AVs, and even (in some cases) model airplanes and rockets.

      Now, as to if the CAOC would tell Reuters anything other than the time of day, that's anyone's guess.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    2. Re:Drones? by DeathToBill · · Score: 1

      I thought for a moment you'd slipped 'SS' in there as a joke...

      --
      Slashdot - News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters, in ISO-8859-1 Has just realised that beta makes this signature redundant
    3. Re:Drones? by crazyjj · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you believe the CIA (and you would have to be a pretty epic moron to), they're not even flying drones over Iran. Do you really think they would admit that one of the drones that they're *not* flying over Iran just got shot down?

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    4. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      These aren't the drones you're looking for?

    5. Re:Drones? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      I doubt Sherrif Joe is flying anything near Iran. Nor would the Secret Service, NSA, FBI, or ATF. The remaining entities on your list all talk to each other, all share the same airspace, and all report to one authority. This is why we have Combatant Commands. The Commander for U.S. Central Command has authority and cognizance over everything in that theater. Back in the day, like WWII, we had a War Dept and a Dept of the Navy and they didn't work together very well. Now we have one Defense Dept and regional Combatant Commands to manage interagency coordination such as this. It's still possible someone didn't manage their inventory well and I guess the U.S. might deliberately lie to cover up the loss of one small tactical UAV, but if the U.S. is saying they didn't lose one, that's the way to bet.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    6. Re:Drones? by Flytrap · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the response to the loss of the first drone initially similar... that is, until the Iranian's put it on display.

      So, now the waiting game starts... we want visual confirmation before we will admit to having lost yet another drone.

    7. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The specific quote, glossed over by many news organizations, is that the Navy isn't missing any drones. Since they were the only US entity authorized for operations in the area in question, that should cover all the bases, but other branches are in the process of checking their inventory anyway.

    8. Re:Drones? by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 1

      Social Security?

    9. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Official response to a question by a reporter: "All U.S. drones are within operating areas, not above Iran. All are using the latest mapping technology from our private partners, such as Apple."

    10. Re:Drones? by TWX · · Score: 1

      Secret Service, actually. I hadn't figured on that one getting confused.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    11. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty well established that what they put on display was a mock-up. While it doesn't change the fact that they did down that particular drone, it is important to point out that they were still utterly full of shit when it came to announcing the details. Remember that this is the same country which just got caught shopping a four-year-old image of a Japanese quad-copter in an attempt to show off its drone-manufacturing prowess.

    12. Re:Drones? by timeOday · · Score: 1

      If Iran produces photos of the drone, then the CIA will argue it was over international waters, not Iranian airspace. You read it here first.

    13. Re:Drones? by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      Actually, come to think of it, this may just be one of Apple's mapping drones that strayed off course. Wouldn't be the first time that happened...

    14. Re:Drones? by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      More likely it's a Google Street View camera car with a flat tire.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    15. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The United States Coast Guard doesn't have any drones.

    16. Re:Drones? by rwise2112 · · Score: 1

      I looked up the ScanEagle and found it's from Insitu. The company I work for used to operate the civilian version of the the same drone, and I'm really suprised they would not be missing any, as we used to lose them on a regular basis. They are autonomous drones with no operator required - they are simply pre-programmed with a flight path.

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    17. Re:Drones? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Now, as to if the CAOC would tell Reuters anything other than the time of day, that's anyone's guess.

      My guess is that even the state of the clocks on the walls are classified.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    18. Re:Drones? by IS2 · · Score: 1

      The military one usually have a pilot.

    19. Re:Drones? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      The military one usually have a pilot.

      A little, tiny pilot? How does that work?

      Back to reality. They could have just leased one on their own. Much easier....

      Leasing is becoming a fast-growing business in the drone marketplace, with foreign governments essentially renting the aircraft, ground support and operators through fixed contracts. That relieves foreign governments of costly capital commitments and keeps cutting-edge military technology out of their hands.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    20. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These aren't the drones you're looking for. *small hand wave*

      FTFY

    21. Re:Drones? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Even the top secret CIA ones? They didn't seem to have any data on rendition flights, for example.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:Drones? by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      Then what happened last time when they denied the capture of RQ-170? They wanted the government to be humiliated?

    23. Re:Drones? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Yep, and there aren't any cowboy operations, and commanders in the field who "know" better than headquarters, and absolutely no fuck-ups in the chain of command. Nope, no siree, not one . . .

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    24. Re:Drones? by idontgno · · Score: 1

      The ground operator of a drone, even an autonomous one, is the pilot of record. And I never tease a military pilot about how short they are. They're very sensitive to that, considering I was a hulking enlisted.

      And, yes, ScanEagle does use a ground control system for real-time mission management. ScanEagles do fly autonomously, and can do so to a completely pre-planned mission plan, but I think the preferred mode of operation is by real-time control, so that the UAV can be commanded to take a closer look at "interesting stuff". I don't think the real-time control is stick-and-throttle stuff like other UAVs use... more like mission command plus navigation. But that's just speculation on my part.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    25. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...all with drones. Could any one entity speak for all of those at this point?

      Though your point is well made, I believe it is fair to assume:


      •    
      • there are a "limited" number of drones flying over Iranian airspace at the moment, and
      • data is currently being sucked from those drones as fast as possible 24hrs/day

      It is therefore reasonable to assume that the Defense/State Depts. would know almost immediately if one went down.

    26. Re:Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should get some. That search part in search and rescue would be more productive as well as detecting those semi-submersibles.

    27. Re:Drones? by DeathToBill · · Score: 1

      Schutzstaffel, anyone?

      --
      Slashdot - News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters, in ISO-8859-1 Has just realised that beta makes this signature redundant
  6. Propaganda by ShaunC · · Score: 1

    The Iranian press agency is starting to remind me more and more of Saddam's Minister of Information. "The rivers are running with the blood of infidels! We have shot down another drone!"

    --
    Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    1. Re:Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Iranian press agency is starting to remind me more and more of Saddam's Minister of Information. "The rivers are running with the blood of infidels! We have shot down another drone!"

      I just remember you the "RQ170" drone!

    2. Re:Propaganda by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 2

      Or they'll parade around the drone on TV giving it premium fuel and coercing it to look grateful in an attempt to show how benevolent they are to their prisoners.

    3. Re:Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that last year they really downed a US drone, an RQ-170, probably the most advanced piece of technology of the USAF. Basically now Iran has the same technology the US waited decades to have, and that Russia and China still don't have.

    4. Re:Propaganda by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps this video will open your eyes. I could not find the original PressTV video. This one is translated by an arabic station.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljbbuuC-ftE

    5. Re:Propaganda by atrain728 · · Score: 1

      You are far overstating the value of having a damaged unmanned system in their possession. You are also overstating the value of the RQ-170, which is notably absent of many cutting edge technologies.

  7. Re:Al-taqqiya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People lie; their religion is irrelevant.

  8. Of course that's their response. by JustAnotherIdiot · · Score: 1

    I'd honestly be more concerned if they actually admitted to missing one.

    --
    What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
    1. Re:Of course that's their response. by SJHillman · · Score: 2

      It's not missing, it has stealth capabilities so advanced it can even affect inventory systems. The only known countermeasure is counting on your toes.

    2. Re:Of course that's their response. by dk90406 · · Score: 1

      "Not missing any drones" == "All drones accounted for"
      That may well be "200 in our bases and one shoot down and in the water at coordinates (...)."
      It is all a matter of interpretation.

    3. Re:Of course that's their response. by pjabardo · · Score: 1

      They will eventually. First they will deny it. Then they will say that the drone experienced mechanical problems and was destroyed and after a while they will recognize that the Iranians really have the drone but they didn't shoot it down or anything, some random problem downed it. At least that's what happened the last time.

    4. Re:Of course that's their response. by idontgno · · Score: 1

      "Not missing any drones" may mean "Yeah, it's gone, but I don't miss it. It was always a cruel faithless bitch. It's gone forever, and and I'm, like, FREE, man. Free for the first time in YEARS."

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  9. These arn't the drones you are looking for. by DarthVain · · Score: 4, Funny

    Those aren't the drones we are looking for. Move along.

  10. Re:Al-taqqiya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Muslims lie

    I modded you flamebait for this. I don't necessarily disagree with the rest, but you can't make blanket statements like that. It's not part of the religion itself to carry on like this, and, much as I dislike so much of the Islamic philosophy, I have known many Muslims who are kind, honest, thoughtful and don't think ill of those outside the religion. It's not helpful to anger or to try to incite hatred in others.

  11. Looks Legit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This video looks a lot more legit than the last one.

    But, the displayed machine is remarkably intact.

    I'm wondering if this video isn't of a Scan Eagle at an air or weapons show.

    1. Re:Looks Legit? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      This video looks a lot more legit than the last one.

      But, the displayed machine is remarkably intact.

      I'm wondering if this video isn't of a Scan Eagle at an air or weapons show.

      I doubt that. That would imply that the Iranians have mastered After Effects (take the generic background and replace it with the Iranian one). They've barely gone past Photoshop 101. Give them a few years....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  12. Bag limit? by kurt555gs · · Score: 2

    Isn't it drone season over there?

    --
    * Carthago Delenda Est *
    1. Re:Bag limit? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wabbit season.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Bag limit? by mrmagos · · Score: 5, Funny

      Drone season, fire!
      ...
      You're despicable.

      --
      Never start vast projects with half-vast ideas.
    3. Re:Bag limit? by udoschuermann · · Score: 1

      Dammit, now you guys owe me a new keyboard!!

      --
      --Udo.
  13. Who else has drones droning around Iran? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    Maybe Israel . . . ? Or maybe the UK . . . ?

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Who else has drones droning around Iran? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Israel . . . ? Or maybe the UK . . . ?

      Not the UK - we dont have any money.

      Maybe the Israelis - because its American money anyway.

  14. Re:Al-taqqiya by pjabardo · · Score: 1

    Just like they lied when they captured a drone, apparently intact, a while ago.

  15. Newsflash: This is not an achievement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why does anyone care?

    Sorry, I shouldn't be like that. So...let me get the facts straight here. A country that is well known for saber rattling without anything to back it up may or may not have shot down an incredibly slow flying, cheap, pilotless, unstealthed drone that is specifically purpose-built to get shot down so we don't have to risk more expensive planes and pilots. That's it, right?

    Just out of curiosity, how are the Kardashians doing today? I mean as long as we're acting like unimpressive bullshit is news, might as well go all the way.

    Let me know when they shoot down an F-22 Raptor or a B-2 Spirit. Until then, non-news. I mean hell, this is exactly why we use drones in the first place - so we don't have to risk either pilots or much more expensive planes to do this stuff. Let them shoot down 1,000 more for all I care. Just more american workers in american aircraft factories with more work to do. Nobody dies, and it benefits our domestic economy. By all means Iran, PLEASE, shoot down some more easy targets so we can mass-produce some more replacements for them.

    1. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just out of curiosity, how are the Kardashians doing today? I mean as long as we're acting like unimpressive bullshit is news, might as well go all the way.

      Coincidentally, the Kardashians are still alive and well. Perhaps this was the drone with their name on it?

    2. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by SilentStaid · · Score: 1

      I'd watch the 3 act play that begins with Robert Kardashian protecting the innocent ex-football star, falling from grace, and then the drone that fails to kill him before the time vortex allows him to unleash his spawn upon the world...

      Oh wait, only Iran is allowed to make shit up on the internet?

      Also, I smell a Tony.

    3. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by canadiannomad · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let them shoot down 1,000 more for all I care. Just more american workers in american aircraft factories with more work to do. Nobody dies, and it benefits our domestic economy.

      Please stop saying that building something with non-renewable resources and blowing it up improves the economy.
      http://economics.about.com/od/warandtheeconomy/a/warsandeconomy.htm
      or
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

      --
      Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
    4. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      The trouble is that in the United States, it is politically acceptable to spend $50 billion on drones and missiles, but not politically acceptable to spend $1 billion on scientific research. It's also easier in the US to find money for schools in Afghanistan than it is to find money for schools in Alabama.

      I'm still not really quite sure where that comes from, but it's very very true.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    5. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by stymy · · Score: 1

      The point is that if they can hijack drones, the technology can probably scale up very easily to take out all US drones, or at least all of those that are of a certain make. If they're just doing it by jamming GPS and sending fake routing signals, that could be done to the US's entire fleet in a war.

    6. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by Sabathius · · Score: 1

      I think it may have something do do with the Poppies growing in Afghanistan.

    7. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they didn't shoot it down. It's fully intact just like the stealth drone they possess. So it's very valuable that they are capturing entire planes. Similar things were done during the cold war. Except this time it isn't unethical pilots but buggy software which would be very devastating. Imagine, what if they could command our entire fleet against us during a war...

    8. Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement by unixguy98 · · Score: 1

      Iran captured and seized the drones, not downed them. So It has access to the cutting edge technologies used to create sophisticated drones. You don't care about this fact? For sure it does not have a positive effect on US domestic economy. And, also it is wrong to call RQ-170 , "an incredibly slow flying, cheap, pilotless, unstealthed drone". It is the drone captured by Iran in 2011.

  16. what's so special about downing a drone ? by charlesrg · · Score: 1

    Sometimes they fail on their own. Aren't they built to fail ?
    Some can barely be launched.
    Even the ones that should know how to operate then fail too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaIVcwVWps4

    1. Re:what's so special about downing a drone ? by Flytrap · · Score: 1

      As far as I am aware, when a drone fails it crashes... or automatically returns to base
      Both the first drone and the ScanEagle appear to be fairly intact. I highly doubt that we are landing drones on Iranian runways.

    2. Re:what's so special about downing a drone ? by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      GPS jamming is on the cards.

    3. Re:what's so special about downing a drone ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best case some exploit has been discovered or worse, C2 private keys have been compromised.
      Having some knowledge of INS no amount of GPS jamming is going to cause aircraft this expensive to just land on a random runway in enemy territory.

  17. Re:Al-taqqiya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Muslims lie

    I modded you flamebait for this. I don't necessarily disagree with the rest, but you can't make blanket statements like that. It's not part of the religion itself to carry on like this, and, much as I dislike so much of the Islamic philosophy, I have known many Muslims who are kind, honest, thoughtful and don't think ill of those outside the religion. It's not helpful to anger or to try to incite hatred in others.

    And in replying to this post (while logged in) even anonymously, you have undone your moderation. The xenophobe's post is now at 0 instead of its deserved -1. Time to wait for another moderator to come along and readjust.

  18. time for retribution by Xicor · · Score: 0

    i believe it is long past the time that we should have just carpet bombed them back to the stone age.

  19. Well thankfully... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they didn't capture one of our manned drones.

  20. Damn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...and Sheriff Joe Arpaio all with drones

    If Sheriff Joe got one of his drones all the way to Iran, then I have newfound respect for the man!

  21. You can't spoof military M-code GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish Iran would stop insulting our intelligences. You can spoof plaintext GPS in consumer hardware, but you can't spoof military M-code GPS. It is protected by RSA public key encryption, so unless the Iranians obtained the RSA private keys of US military GPS satellites they cannot fool any drone.

    Or maybe Iran cracked RSA's impossibly hard prime factorization problem? Maybe they have quantum computers that did it right ?

    1. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But you can intercept the signal, delay it sightly, then re-broadcast it using a directional antenna so that the drone picks up your (stronger) signal. The slight delay makes the drone think it is further away from the satellite, therefore you can make it believe that it is anywhere you want it to be (and therefore override its autopilot).

    2. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by IS2 · · Score: 1

      This UAV usually has a pilot controlling it, not an autopilot.

    3. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't even do that. The clock skew would cause the M-code data to be determined invalid. The pilot controlling the aircraft would immediately be aware that jamming was occurring.

    4. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you can intercept the signal, delay it sightly, then re-broadcast it using a directional antenna so that the drone picks up your (stronger) signal. The slight delay makes the drone think it is further away from the satellite, therefore you can make it believe that it is anywhere you want it to be (and therefore override its autopilot).

      However you must remember that GPS works by contacting at least 4, and usually 10, satellites at the same time.
      Iran would need to spoof the signal from that many satellites and delay them all properly without inconsistencies....

      Also lets not forget the larger drones (like the RQ 170) have inertial guidance, so spoofing a GPS signal doesn't do everything. The drone would immediately recognize the difference in inertial and the spoofed GPS signal. No matter how gradual the spoofing is, after a while that difference is going to be huge and only a total fool would not program a drone to notice that discrepancy.

    5. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

    6. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by IS2 · · Score: 1

      This UAV actually doesn't use the military M-code, doesn't need to.

    7. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoofing a drone that doesn't use M-code gets you a drone that isn't worth bragging about spoofing anyway.

    8. Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      It is not a military drone, it's a cheap remote sensing drone.

  22. Simple Explanation by hduff · · Score: 1

    They shot down their own drone clone.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  23. Pics or it didn't happen... by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    Oh wait, Iran keep photoshopping those. Ok, let's just leave it at "it didn't happen" to save everyone wasting their time.

  24. BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by Flytrap · · Score: 1

    The "captured" ScanEagle drone was clearly not shot down... and its pristine structure indicates that it didn't crash either.

    Doesn't it concern everybody that Iran appears to be able to capture these drones out of the sky and land them fairly intact... with minimal to no exterior damage.

    Does this give credence to Iran's claim that they are able to take over the controls of a drone and land it relatively safely without too much structural damage?

    Is it possible that they could override the controls of a cruise missile as it enters their airspace... and send it back from whence it came... gasp!

    I understand the logic of having a more powerful ground transmitter that overwhelms the week satellite transmitted signals used to control drones and missiles... but that is still a far cry from actually overriding the controls of a sophisticated drone and tricking the drone into believing that it is still receiving legitimate instructions.

    Don't all drones have an automatic "return to base" command as soon as they lose contact with their controllers... at the very least they should have a self destruct.

    1. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by Bieeanda · · Score: 1

      No, because Iran has been caught doctoring and outright stealing images for propaganda purposes on multiple occasions. Occam's razor indicates that, as usual, they're full of shit.

    2. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      They probably just bought one on Ebay.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    3. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by gtall · · Score: 1

      "self-destruct"? On a drone? The amount of material you would need to detonate would completely swamp the usual payload. The don't have it because they cannot afford the weight to carry it.

    4. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by IS2 · · Score: 1

      ScanEagles crash, and this one likely did in the water (no prop damage). I can assure you they didn't "trick" it to land as it requires a closed loop data stream to catch its arresting wire correctly. The UAV does have the ability to return to base unless GPS signal is lost.

    5. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1
      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because the US air-force can simply deploy the more capable manned aircraft (B-2, F-22, A-10, B-52, etc.), which aren't vulnerable to such measures, if these claims are true.

      Also cruise missiles don't have to be guided remotely. they have built in fall-overs to inertial guidance that could be used instead. The issue is those systems are less precise so it's more expensive and causes more collateral damage to destroy a target with missiles that have their GPS link deactivated. And in addition to that US bases and navy ships typicality have close in armament to defend against enemy cruise missiles. They can likely destroy their own cruise missile trivially (even assuming it fails to respond to the destruct command when it is seen to be off target).

      The point of drones is they're cheaper than alternatives and therefore a good choice in asymmetric warfare where one side has military superiority and the other is trying to be "too expensive" to be worth eradicating.

    7. Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      As if it was legal to do such leases... Iran is under an embargo so tight, their economy is a very bad state causing riots only this summer.

  25. The reality is... by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    http://www.airhogs.com/ has a test facility in Iraq. 7 year old boys are considerably more abusive on flying drones then Iran is.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  26. US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by Koreantoast · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just to politely point out that the United States is not the only ScanEagle operator in the region. Several coalition nations including Canada, Poland, Australia and the Netherlands operate ScanEagle platforms and could very well be using them in theater to support operations in Afghanistan. Also, this particular type of drone is not as big of a deal; considering it was originally designed to help fishermen find schools of fish, this isn't exactly the pinnacle of drone technology.

    1. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2

      Aren't several tankers using these systems to provide advanced warning on Somali pirates? I would be much more curious if it is a military version or a commercial version...

    2. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by IS2 · · Score: 1

      The only difference between commercial and military is the radios, no way to tell externally.

    3. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      I am pretty sure the sensor package would be different too, but my main point was that the level of security on the commercial vs military versions is (hopefully) quite different.

    4. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by IS2 · · Score: 1

      Nope, they use the same daylight camera (and it is a vis-light model). The commercial and mil-spec radios are different, but mainly in power and freqs.

    5. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It is a big deal because it shows how the US is actively sending aircraft into Iranian airspace without authorization. Imagine if Iran started flying drones over the US.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by idontgno · · Score: 1

      It isn't a big deal because it's actually airspace over international waters that Iran fantasizes is their national domain.

      Or haven't you heard? Apparently almost the entire Persian Gulf is theirs, because it's Persian.

      They allow international shipping through their Strait of Hormuz out of the beneficience of their kindly hearts.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    7. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by cusco · · Score: 1

      I hope they'd be smart enough to print 'Google Maps' or something on the side of it before launch.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    8. Re:US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region by Dan+East · · Score: 1

      Saudi Arabia operates that exact kind of drone as well, according to a news report I read today. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Kuwait has some, and possibly even Iraq.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
  27. On the one hand, the CIA is not likely to admit they've lost a drone.

    On the other hand, Iran has a well documented history of lying about its accomplishments.

    Hard to determine the truth here...

  28. Isreal remains mum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    probably should also check that skynet^W google isn't missing any drones.

  29. This wouldn't of happened by Dyinobal · · Score: 1

    This wouldn't of happened if they had bought from a Gallente design instead of these knock offs.

  30. Meanwhile in UAE... by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    A UAE sheikh complained that some delinquent Iranian children had shot one of his prize eagles and is claiming 10 billion Dirhams blood money...

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  31. No big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ScanEagles have been captured nearly intact before, after crashing in Iraq, by irregular forces. There is no real intelligence value in the UAV itself as most parts are commercially available. This does appear to be a real ScanEagle that likely crashed into the water (note that the prop isn't damaged). It is not a US Navy or USMC UAV as it is lacking the proper markings ( US roundel and "Navy").

    1. Re:No big deal by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      The fact that it is missing any roundels shouts CIA.

  32. Self Destruct? by treerex · · Score: 1
    One has to wonder why these machines don't have some form of self-destruct mechanism built in for situations where they are legitimately shot down or otherwise captured.

    Or perhaps it's a nefarious CIA plot to sneak a Stuxnet-like virus into Iran's C&C infrastructure:

    Tech 1: We have successfully downloaded the ROM from the drone into our systems. Allahu-Akbar!

    Tech 2: Huh. Why have our radar and air defense systems suddenty gone off-line?

    1. Re:Self Destruct? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to self-destruct, it uses mostly commercial parts. The really important part of the system is the software in the base station for video processing.

    2. Re:Self Destruct? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yaaaa, how about sending harry potter with the drone to do those magics you named.

    3. Re:Self Destruct? by mbkennel · · Score: 1

      "One has to wonder why these machines don't have some form of self-destruct mechanism built in for situations where they are legitimately shot down or otherwise captured."

      A sufficiently energetic self-destruct could be dangerous for the air crews which regularly have to service, launch and retrieve them. This can malfunction as well. To be safe, you need an affirmative self-destruct which works only when given a signal from the legitimate ground station and the drone is in a mission state. But losing communication is precisely the scenario when a self-destruct would be needed. A "self-destruct if I can't figure out what's up" could be quite dangerous to the legitimate users day in and day out.

      And it's expense and weight that can't be devoted to payload.

      Otherwise, crashing from sufficient altitude is usually sufficient.

    4. Re:Self Destruct? by treerex · · Score: 1
      "Otherwise, crashing from sufficient altitude is usually sufficient."

      Except in the two cases where Iran claims to have captured our drones, presumably while they were flying.

      I understand the safety concerns. I would argue that you have similar safety issues with ordinance as well, and there are well known ways of dealing with those.

  33. No indeed, it just claims the US president wasn't by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    No indeed, it just claims the US president wasn't born in the US, that aliens crashed and are kept at Area 51 and that 9/11 was an inside job.

    I actually watched a Discovery "documentary" which claimed that helicopters can not have ejection seats. A surprise to the Russian helicopter pilots.

    The US TV/News/Media has done such a thorough job of lying they don't need insane claims, they don't work anyway. Remember, the master of propaganda, Himmler, favored a movie that had a Jew as the hero to spread the nazi parties message. Subtle does the trick, outrageous claims fool no-one they just receive applause from people who know to clap for the emperor no matter how naked he is.

    The subtle stuff, that gets people to BELIEVE the emperor is finely dressed. And indeed, I seen the claim that helicopters can't have ejection seats repeated often.

    Just ask a US citizen whether they believe any other country can actually be first with a tech and that the US isn't always best regardless. When you prove them wrong with facts from the CIA own data, I even had Americans claim the CIA was a UN agency setup to reduce American power...

    Subtle works best, just see how often a tech site like this publishes Fox and Daily Mail "stories" and worst, that obvious hoax of a plastic necklace found on mars.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  34. Big Whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if they have got one it's an off the shelf product that Iran could easily get their hands on.

    If the US are not flying drones illegally over Iran I'd be amazed. Anyone who believes they are not is just plain naive.
    Of course they do not admit it. But if they did their response to Iran would undoubtedly be:

    "Bully for you.
    We've got lots more of them drones and they kill people good.
    Keep taunting us if you want.
    We're just looking for an excuse right now."

  35. Certainly looks staged by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

    Check out the video here

    In the very first second you can see "We shall trample the U.S." above the drone.

    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
  36. We're not missing any drones. by Zcar · · Score: 1

    We know exactly where they all are, including the one Iran just captured.

  37. I find Iran claims to be so crediable NOT! by peter303 · · Score: 0

    Especially about the Holocaust never happening, etc. Anyone who gives two cents to an Iran claim, deserves to believe it.

    1. Re:I find Iran claims to be so crediable NOT! by blackpaw · · Score: 1

      Especially about the Holocaust never happening, etc.

      If they'd ever actually said that you *might* have had a point.

      Classic case of USA media lies and a credulous ignorant public.

  38. So US admits it flies drones over other countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > The U.S. said it was looking into the reports.
    > "We're not missing any drones."
    Why didn't they say "it's untrue, because we have no drones over Iran"?
    So US admits it flies drones over other countries, they are not at war with.
    I guess UN should take care of it and probably the best solution would be to ban US of A from the surface of the Earth.

  39. Oh, if only by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    and Sheriff Joe Arpaio all withdrones

    If only Iran could down Arpaio...

  40. Awww mannn, there goes my Hobby Hut plane by NickGnome · · Score: 1

    Awww mannn, there goes my Hobby Hut plane.

  41. Just an observation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The USA might want to look into gettign a PR rep. It's a bad thing when my first reaction to this story was to believe the Iranians.

    There is definitely a problem if people in north america immediately are dimissing your answers as lies.

  42. ScanEagles are unmarked too by Koreantoast · · Score: 1

    I should also add this tidbit from the BBC: given the nature of the work being done by drones (recon, spying), most of them are unmarked. With so many different users of the ScanEagle in the region (UAE was listed for example, another nation with just as much reason to spy on Iran), it may be impossible to determine short of a serial number, and I doubt the Iranians are going to let the US take a look any time soon.

    The video attached to the article also shows Iranian images of the drone.
    Iranian TV shows off 'captured US ScanEagle drone'

  43. US drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's about time the rest of the world developed a cheap and easy way to knock these things out of the air - especially as most of them seem to be deployed illegally, any way.
    It will happen sooner or later and the sooner the better.

  44. Self-destruct? by GuruBuckaroo · · Score: 1

    Seriously, pack every available space inside the fuselage with C4, and when someone "captures" one of your drones, wait a couple of hours for them to put it somewhere sensitive... and blow it up. "What? Not our fault you guys mis-handled our equipment.":

    --
    Poor means hoping the toothache goes away.
    1. Re:Self-destruct? by Traf-O-Data-Hater · · Score: 1

      How would you feel if the drone, having malfunctioned, came down in a field and was found by a group of children, who being curious decide to play with it and set it off? Booby traps are despicable.

  45. Oh No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big Bird got shot down again !

  46. These aren't the drones you're looking for... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    xx

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  47. Exactly. If Iran downs a drone every 6 months... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    we'll go broke right about the time the sun goes dark.

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
  48. Analyst by Oxford_Comma_Lover · · Score: 1

    Analysts will post on slashdot. Some of them. Sometimes. Operations people are less likely to.

    Professional liars work in law, public relations, lobbying, or politics. And not everyone in those professions qualifies. Relatively few intelligence analysts are professional liars. Some have unusual worldviews, but it's not the same thing.

    --
    -- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
  49. assholes by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
    ":(The U.S. response so far, also reported by Reuters and others, seems to be "We're not missing any drones.")"

    Fine. And when the photos show up? Then what?

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  50. US falls 27 places worldwide freedom of the press by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    The United States has been downgraded. Reporters Without Borders has released its annual World Press Freedom Index and the United States fell 27 points to No. 47 on the list.

    The US tie with Argentina, Romania and Latvia at âoesatisfactoryâ levels of freedom.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  51. Re:US falls 27 places worldwide freedom of the pre by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

    The United States has been downgraded. Reporters Without Borders has released its annual World Press Freedom Index and the United States fell 27 points to No. 47 on the list.

    The US tie with Argentina, Romania and Latvia at âoesatisfactoryâ levels of freedom.

    WORLD PRESS FREEDOM INDEX 2011-2012

    The crackdown on protest movements and the accompanying excesses took their toll on journalists. In the space of two months in the United States, more than 25 were subjected to arrests and beatings at the hands of police who were quick to issue indictments for inappropriate behaviour, public nuisance or even lack of accreditation

    So some journalists and probably many "journalists" were mixed in with the "Occupy" crowd and didn't comply with orders to vacate? Not going to sweat that too much without evidence of actual wrong doing.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell