Reports say the US is to get its top secret surveillance drone back from Iran. The catch is, the device, intercepted in December, has been reduced to 1:80 of its original size and is being marketed as a popular toy.
By my logic, cool for them, finders keepers right; the Army/CIA was trying to creep and messed doing it, why shouldn't they keep it. But since Lockeheed-Martin is involved and since it's experiemntal CIA property; bye bye Iran.
I didn't get the sense that this article was all that warhawkish... just kind of light hearted and funny. But thanks for working out all those "simple facts" and "physical impossibilities" for us!
I didn't think that I'd need to explain why it's 'physically impossible', but I said it for two reasons. I researched Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Power specifically, about 3 years ago for some papers; I didn't learn enough to call myself an expert but I know enough to know that Iran currently doesn't have the required set up to enrich Uranium up to Plutonium and put it into any sort of missile.
Currently, they only enrich to about like 5%-12% Uranium which is very far from Plutonium; hence very far from being weapons grade and far from military useable. So like many of the mainstream were claiming falsely, Iran does not have nuclear weapons and/or the capabilities of such within a '2 week period', or what ever they said.ಠ_ಠ
Hopefully that provides more insight, I had seen a video that confirmed my initial belief that Iran didn't have and were not seeking weapons/military nuclear use. If I didn't lose the link I would have provided it initially and explained in my OP, but since I knew it'd be tough for me to explain without the link I didn't want to attempt it.
Iran can currently build a bomb via the enriched Uranium route. If they can stockpile enough LEU (that lovely 5% stuff you are talking about), they do have the technology to convert it into enough weapons grade Uranium to make a 25kg bomb in about 2 months time. An enrichment facility of about the right size to further enrich Uranium in step with Iran's LEU production rate is under construction in Qom (the facility is regarded by most experts to be too small to have much commercial use). This dosn't prove anything by any means, but it certainly justifies concerns about Iran's possible acquisition of nukes.
This is not really a question of Physics, but rather one of politics and the validity of your (or anybody's) information. The primary reason for such heavy international suspicion of Iran's nuclear program is the country's repeated failure to disclose information to the IAEA. If the intentions of the program are purely peaceful, than why build a secret Heavy Water facility at Arak? What explains the Green Salt Project? Why does Iran refuse to grant IAEA inspectors full access to its enrichment facilities? And would you trust the administration of Ahmedinejad, the man who rigged his 2009 reelection campaign, has a track record of disregarding human rights, and claims that gay people don't exist in his country, with answers to these questions in the first place? If not, would you trust that administration with a bomb?
We can't conclude that anything is "physically impossible" precisely because we have no "simple facts", and what we do have is unsettling to say the least. Check these out to brush up on your research a little bit, as it seems like you may have forgotten a few things over the past 3 years or so:
Ok, so first off, I gotta say I love that you felt the need to take 5 days to make a post. Based on the content of your post, it's easy to say that, now, you've done some research of your own; but you fail to realize that true understanding comes from pure information and not one of bias. To understand the information you have to understand the source.
Albeit, I didn't provide much information about where my sources are, I need not because the ones that your provide are the only ones of concern. It makes me have a feeling that you're either new to this whole conspiracy stuff or maybe against them or maybe just naive; whatever the case, most people here at conspiracy will be wise enough to dismiss your link[1] + [3], on account that the CFR is nothing more than a 'shill' corporation posing as, and decieving many as, an offical American Government Body; much the likes of the Federal Reserve.
Since I have a feeling that, uhh, at /r/conspiracy . Here's a bunch of 'homegrown' post showing how we at /r/conspiracy feel about the CFR.
And on the topic of 'secret' facilities that aren't allowed to be inspected, and outdated knowledge, even in, the three year old, Link[2] that you provide they say after 'repeated requests', who knows why they had to be repeated, "IAEA was able to carry out a design information verification (DIV) and, as a result, noted that the reactor vessel is not yet present. Iran stated that the vessel would be installed in 2011." Alas, link[4] is 4 years old and a it'd be a huge headache to read since I've read and researched with newer sources, one of which being this article from 2010 but last updated 2011, which is commending the progress in safety and this, the most recent report from the IAEA webiste...which further explains that the facility at Arak which you referred to won't be completed until 2013.
So really we could shoo this shits over this on the internet all day but I've got RL shit to do so I'll just end this soon, but while we're still on the topic of 'secret' facilities that aren't allowed to be inspected let us never forget one of the many reason's 'they' killed JFK, Dimona.
Bonus: Albeit Gaddafi, here's a clip in which he is talking about what Obama's thoughts on Iran and Israel WMDs might be, in which he references JFKs fate.
And maybe they could have, but somewhere else in the media they also claimed that Iran had taken control of it and landed the drone; so I guess who really knows what happened?
Certainly not me; I'm just some-guy who tries to pay attention to whats going on to attempt to understand what actually is going on, rather-than accept what 'they want you to believe'.
Being in the IT security field and knowing about the security lapses lately (e.g. wikileaks; Bradley Manning is a hero BTW), I can see military personal being overconfident with Iran and them taking control of a drone. It's not outside the realm of possibility (who wants to bet it was an unencrypted/barely scrambled RF transmission to control those things?)
But yes, who knows what happened? I don't really care. I just don't want to see us go to war with Iran...or anyone else. I wish the war industry in this country would collapse, instead of the housing/banking industry. They are the ones that are literally manufacturing the means of death.
20 comments
9 frostek 2012-01-17
Amusing.
6 [deleted] 2012-01-17
4 9000sins 2012-01-17
Haha. This is like it was from a cartoon.
4 [deleted] 2012-01-17
If you want to understand why the news seems to be pushing for a war with Iran on the physically imposible conclusion that Iran is attempting to create and foster Nuclear weapons; the other simple fact that they are NOT seeking nuclear weapons has also been publically said, by Panetta, on national tv. And that's not to mention the fact that the IAEA report is riddled with slanted opinions and false conclusions.
Then we should, if you saw it, remember that the CIA/Army lost an experimental, version of a, spy drone that fell out of the sky over Iran a while back. Obviously, we wanted it back but Iran, obviously, didnt' want to give it back; first the news said they would give it to China to study, but why would they do that? China and Iran are friends, but Iran has people just as smart there so instead they're keeping it for themselves. And now this.
By my logic, cool for them, finders keepers right; the Army/CIA was trying to creep and messed doing it, why shouldn't they keep it. But since Lockeheed-Martin is involved and since it's experiemntal CIA property; bye bye Iran.
2 MustardForBreakfast 2012-01-17
I didn't get the sense that this article was all that warhawkish... just kind of light hearted and funny. But thanks for working out all those "simple facts" and "physical impossibilities" for us!
1 [deleted] 2012-01-17
I didn't think that I'd need to explain why it's 'physically impossible', but I said it for two reasons. I researched Nuclear Physics and Nuclear Power specifically, about 3 years ago for some papers; I didn't learn enough to call myself an expert but I know enough to know that Iran currently doesn't have the required set up to enrich Uranium up to Plutonium and put it into any sort of missile.
Currently, they only enrich to about like 5%-12% Uranium which is very far from Plutonium; hence very far from being weapons grade and far from military useable. So like many of the mainstream were claiming falsely, Iran does not have nuclear weapons and/or the capabilities of such within a '2 week period', or what ever they said.ಠ_ಠ
Hopefully that provides more insight, I had seen a video that confirmed my initial belief that Iran didn't have and were not seeking weapons/military nuclear use. If I didn't lose the link I would have provided it initially and explained in my OP, but since I knew it'd be tough for me to explain without the link I didn't want to attempt it.
0 MustardForBreakfast 2012-01-17
Iran can currently build a bomb via the enriched Uranium route. If they can stockpile enough LEU (that lovely 5% stuff you are talking about), they do have the technology to convert it into enough weapons grade Uranium to make a 25kg bomb in about 2 months time. An enrichment facility of about the right size to further enrich Uranium in step with Iran's LEU production rate is under construction in Qom (the facility is regarded by most experts to be too small to have much commercial use). This dosn't prove anything by any means, but it certainly justifies concerns about Iran's possible acquisition of nukes.
This is not really a question of Physics, but rather one of politics and the validity of your (or anybody's) information. The primary reason for such heavy international suspicion of Iran's nuclear program is the country's repeated failure to disclose information to the IAEA. If the intentions of the program are purely peaceful, than why build a secret Heavy Water facility at Arak? What explains the Green Salt Project? Why does Iran refuse to grant IAEA inspectors full access to its enrichment facilities? And would you trust the administration of Ahmedinejad, the man who rigged his 2009 reelection campaign, has a track record of disregarding human rights, and claims that gay people don't exist in his country, with answers to these questions in the first place? If not, would you trust that administration with a bomb?
We can't conclude that anything is "physically impossible" precisely because we have no "simple facts", and what we do have is unsettling to say the least. Check these out to brush up on your research a little bit, as it seems like you may have forgotten a few things over the past 3 years or so:
http://www.cfr.org/iran/irans-nuclear-program/p16811#p4
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iran/Analysis_IAEA_Report.pdf
http://www.cfr.org/publication/16373/iran_needs_to_come_clean_on_nuclear_military_plans.html?breadcrumb=%2Fbios%2F3348%2F
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2008/gov2008-4.pdf
1 [deleted] 2012-01-17
Ok, so first off, I gotta say I love that you felt the need to take 5 days to make a post. Based on the content of your post, it's easy to say that, now, you've done some research of your own; but you fail to realize that true understanding comes from pure information and not one of bias. To understand the information you have to understand the source.
Albeit, I didn't provide much information about where my sources are, I need not because the ones that your provide are the only ones of concern. It makes me have a feeling that you're either new to this whole conspiracy stuff or maybe against them or maybe just naive; whatever the case, most people here at conspiracy will be wise enough to dismiss your link[1] + [3], on account that the CFR is nothing more than a 'shill' corporation posing as, and decieving many as, an offical American Government Body; much the likes of the Federal Reserve.
Since I have a feeling that, uhh, at /r/conspiracy . Here's a bunch of 'homegrown' post showing how we at /r/conspiracy feel about the CFR.
Chart of links between major US organizations and the Council on Foreign Relations
Wow, I just learned that the Council on Foreign Relations website has a "global governance monitor"
Council on Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commission
Council on Foreign Relations: International Institutions and Global Governance Program World Order in the 21st Century. (
PDF fileReddit link )Does the Council on Foreign relations subvert the constitutional representative process of government?
And on the topic of 'secret' facilities that aren't allowed to be inspected, and outdated knowledge, even in, the three year old, Link[2] that you provide they say after 'repeated requests', who knows why they had to be repeated, "IAEA was able to carry out a design information verification (DIV) and, as a result, noted that the reactor vessel is not yet present. Iran stated that the vessel would be installed in 2011." Alas, link[4] is 4 years old and a it'd be a huge headache to read since I've read and researched with newer sources, one of which being this article from 2010 but last updated 2011, which is commending the progress in safety and this, the most recent report from the IAEA webiste...which further explains that the facility at Arak which you referred to won't be completed until 2013.
So really we could shoo this shits over this on the internet all day but I've got RL shit to do so I'll just end this soon, but while we're still on the topic of 'secret' facilities that aren't allowed to be inspected let us never forget one of the many reason's 'they' killed JFK, Dimona.
Bonus: Albeit Gaddafi, here's a clip in which he is talking about what Obama's thoughts on Iran and Israel WMDs might be, in which he references JFKs fate.
2 sumdog 2012-01-17
Hmm..maybe the US intentionally landed it in Iraq, so they'd capture it and it would give the US an excuse to attack?
2 [deleted] 2012-01-17
Iran*
And maybe they could have, but somewhere else in the media they also claimed that Iran had taken control of it and landed the drone; so I guess who really knows what happened?
Certainly not me; I'm just some-guy who tries to pay attention to whats going on to attempt to understand what actually is going on, rather-than accept what 'they want you to believe'.
1 sumdog 2012-01-17
Yes, I meant Iran. Thanks.
Being in the IT security field and knowing about the security lapses lately (e.g. wikileaks; Bradley Manning is a hero BTW), I can see military personal being overconfident with Iran and them taking control of a drone. It's not outside the realm of possibility (who wants to bet it was an unencrypted/barely scrambled RF transmission to control those things?)
But yes, who knows what happened? I don't really care. I just don't want to see us go to war with Iran...or anyone else. I wish the war industry in this country would collapse, instead of the housing/banking industry. They are the ones that are literally manufacturing the means of death.
3 [deleted] 2012-01-17
[deleted]
2 C1in 2012-01-17
Good on them.
3 sumdog 2012-01-17
I want one; please take my money.
1 [deleted] 2012-01-17
Skynet will remember Irans actions
1 xolieo 2012-01-17
Where do i buy one?
1 [deleted] 2012-01-17
lol indeed
0 bumblingmumbling 2012-01-17
All the kids are going to want one!
-1 mattman59 2012-01-17
They are going to have to sell something once their oil becomes worthless.
-4 [deleted] 2012-01-17
How could they have just "hacked" the drown and be able to fly it down safely? I don't buy it.
2 [deleted] 2012-01-17
[deleted]
1 arsf1357 2012-01-17
lol. they used Tracer-Tee