I know. I just couldn't resist when I saw it was called "Magic".
I know. If only the HOT had a picture attached,....
Let's say, for the sake of example, that an Iranian Air Farce pilot on patrol around the facility, and on the lookout for American drones, received permission to fire at said drones.
Said pilot gets excited, and releases his external centerline or a wing tank instead of a missile (seen it happen before)because he didn't switch the right doohickeys into the right position before he pressed the little red button.Sorta like what our F-16 guy did when he strafed that school in New Jersey.
Then again, perhaps said theorhetical Iranian pilot did in fact punch off a missle at the theorhetical drone, but since said drone is litterally dripping with stealth features, said missile could not obtain a lock and continued in the direction of the nuke facility, either exploding on contact with the ground or any buildings, or, perhaps the pilot finally got around to destroying the missile on his own, but just a bit too late.
Am I correct in thinking that the United States would not use a means of attacking an Iranian nuclear facility that could be identified, such as a drone that could be shot down, an aircrft with men in it that could be shot down, or either succumbing to mechanical/technical failure? No! I say that if we were to do something like that, it would be along the lines of a Tomahawk strike (and there'd be more than one, just to make sure) launched from some distance away.
Without the remains of an aircraft, a drone, or even missile parts that could be identified, you'd have the advantage of "plausible deniability".
The ragheads had an ooops! and haven't figured out how to lie about it yet. It could just as easily have been an industrial accident, terrorists, internal dissdents planting explosives, bad luck or sopmeone on the ground disobeying the "No Smoking" signs.
Let's say, for the sake of example, that an Iranian Air Farce pilot on patrol around the facility, and on the lookout for American drones, received permission to fire at said drones.
Said pilot gets excited, and releases his external centerline or a wing tank instead of a missile (seen it happen before)because he didn't switch the right doohickeys into the right position before he pressed the little red button.Sorta like what our F-16 guy did when he strafed that school in New Jersey.
Then again, perhaps said theorhetical Iranian pilot did in fact punch off a missle at the theorhetical drone, but since said drone is litterally dripping with stealth features, said missile could not obtain a lock and continued in the direction of the nuke facility, either exploding on contact with the ground or any buildings, or, perhaps the pilot finally got around to destroying the missile on his own, but just a bit too late.
Am I correct in thinking that the United States would not use a means of attacking an Iranian nuclear facility that could be identified, such as a drone that could be shot down, an aircrft with men in it that could be shot down, or either succumbing to mechanical/technical failure? No! I say that if we were to do something like that, it would be along the lines of a Tomahawk strike (and there'd be more than one, just to make sure) launched from some distance away.
Without the remains of an aircraft, a drone, or even missile parts that could be identified, you'd have the advantage of "plausible deniability".
The ragheads had an ooops! and haven't figured out how to lie about it yet. It could just as easily have been an industrial accident, terrorists, internal dissdents planting explosives, bad luck or sopmeone on the ground disobeying the "No Smoking" signs.