What an absolute tragedy. Well done to Iran for coming forward, admitting it and expressing their regrets over it. It's a stark cry from the utter denial others have expressed when similar accidents have happened, and astronomically further than when George H. W. Bush proclaimed "I will never apologize for the United States — I don't care what the facts are... I'm not an apologize-for-America kind of guy." when the Navy shot down Iran Air flight 655 in '88.
This coming forward will save the families and nations involved time and effort, and hopefully bring closure all the more quickly for them.
It took them three days to say this. How did it take them three days to realize they shot a missile? Especially since they had a denial campaign going on for three goddamn days.
This was just external pressure on Iran forcing them to do this. If this flight wasn't an international one it would've been swept under the rug.
They knew they shot down the plane just a few minutes after they did it. Yet, they lied about it 3 days straight. Admitting it after 3 days is surely more honest than Russia still not admitting they shot down MH17 5 years ago, but I wouldn't say it's "well done".
If you really want to compare the two events, note that after ~4 hours after the event the US did acknowledge it had shot down the airline. While it did to continue to maintain it wasn't in the wrong, there's a stark difference between that & the multi-day denial of Iran.
There's a pretty good short documentary about the USS Vincennes accidental shooting down of an Iranian commercial flight in 1988. Notably, it discusses the psychological phenomenon of "scenario fulfillment" that allegedly contributed to the disaster.
I'll leave it to more informed commenters here to discuss whether or not such a thing actually exists. But regardless, it's an interesting watch.
And before someone pounces, I'm not bringing this incident up due to any ideological "anti-US" agenda or some such silliness. I just think the doc is interesting, relevant, and worthy of discussion.
I agree it's interesting. But since I haven't seen it mentioned here elsewhere in this thread, I'll bring up the alternate theory that this is a "limited hangout". In this version, Iran starts by professing complete innocence, but eventually confesses to shooting down the plane by mistake, whereas in actuality they shot down the plane intentionally. I have estimate of the likelihood of this explanation, but if it were true, I think it would be a very effective strategy of misdirection.
The main argument against this interpretation is that Iran would have no reason to intentionally shoot down an innocent airliner. I don't know that this is true. One theory is that there were people on the plane they wanted dead even at significant cost in embarassment. This doesn't seem impossible. Another theory is that they shooting was done intentionally by a faction trying to make Iran look bad, and Iran decided that calling it a mistake was less embarrassing than calling it treason or mutiny.
Anyway, my point isn't that there is necessarily some deeper conspiracy, only that it may still be too early to claim that the initial conspiracy theory was entirely correct, or offers a full explanation.
The "engine failure" claim was simply unreasonable. Considering the altitude and the weather, there were a few ways that the aircraft could just suddenly go down without warning:
1. bomb on the aircraft
2. missile strike
3. collision with an aircraft larger than a hobby drone
I looked up nuclear close calls because I thought false positive almost-launches only happened once or twice in the past. I had no idea the last one was in 1995 or that there were much more close calls than I expected. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls
One oops and maybe something gets nuked, but I don't think it makes any sense to worry about the whole world being destroyed. Why would they? I mean, if the US was hit, it would be like 9/11 only bigger, and I'm sure people would be talking about glass parking lots, but why would all the missiles be launched towards everywhere? Who wants to destroy the world and why wouldn't they have done it already? Same goes for any other country.
That seems very likely. They probably had anti-aircraft and anti-missile missile systems fully armed and something either automatically mis-categorized the aircraft as a bomber or missile and shot at it or someone got nervous and trigger happy.
you're probably right -- but the fact that a missile can fire automatically with either 1): inaccurate confidence in the target being what they think it is or 2) an improper confidence threshold allowing for the misclassification of an airliner as a missile, is pretty scary.
One likes to think that automatic missiles should be fairly accurate and confident in their assessments.
My question i've wondered : was the sensitivity deliberately set very high so as to provide counter-attacks no matter what? If that's the case, isn't it more than accidental?
Possibly. Though surely someone (or some algorithm) in the decision chain finds it odd that the enemy bomber takes off from their own countries airfield.
So tragic, and I guess credit to the Iranians for admitting their mistake. It's good to see both sides walking back from war.
Edit: the voting behavior of this is pretty extreme, but I don't even know why. Do people think it isn't good they admitted it? Or is it simply "Iran should never get credit for anything"? Or is it "of course they had to" (which is clearly not the case, as the MH17 and initial denials around the shoot down of Korean Air 007 and Iran Air 655 shows)
> I guess credit to the Iranians for admitting their mistake.
They denied it up until a few hours ago even after the video evidence first dropped. After a bunch of countries said they had intelligence that it was shot down they walked back their story.
Putin isn't capable of admitting that he needs to use a toilet from time to time, because that isn't the way the KGB does things.
In addition I don't want to credit anybody with doing anything good as it is related to harming civilians. Nothing Iran can do related to that plane should in any way reflect anything but negatively on them, unless they can undo the shooting.
At this point we should seriously ban Anti-Air technology, it has already killed more people in peace time than nukes.
I’m no fan of what Trump did. But after a lot of sabre rattling and threats against the US, Iran holds a state funeral where innocent Iranians get crushed to death, launches a token missile strike, then incinerates a bunch of innocent Iranians by accident. How many own goals can you kick in one week?
I don't get what you are comparing? Trump's actions were deliberate, and almost universally acknowledged as misguided, dangerous, and foolish (with the reneging of a working deal the first and largest blunder).
Iran, under pressure, made a mistake. An accident happens. I don't see how one assigns some score to these events, yet your comments reads like "they deserve a few more assassinations and maybe a bit of bombardment for being so stupid as to show nerves when attacked by the fragile masculinity of a superpower in decline".
Yes. Considering the level of incompetency in Iranian military, the first thing they should do is stop the nuke program and focus on reforming their military.
We live in a world where we punish for incorrectly jumping to conclusions.
But we don't punish for not stating correct conclusions when things happen.
Which seems to be a fault in the way things work.
People who go with cowardice, of lets not talk to soon, or don't speculate, or just tow official lines rule. It's why we had Weapons of Mass Destruction. It's why Science has the replication issues. It's not a small thing.
[+] [-] cmdshiftf4|6 years ago|reply
This coming forward will save the families and nations involved time and effort, and hopefully bring closure all the more quickly for them.
[+] [-] aaomidi|6 years ago|reply
It took them three days to say this. How did it take them three days to realize they shot a missile? Especially since they had a denial campaign going on for three goddamn days.
This was just external pressure on Iran forcing them to do this. If this flight wasn't an international one it would've been swept under the rug.
[+] [-] dgudkov|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] egdod|6 years ago|reply
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4763550/user-clip-george-h-w-...
[+] [-] wdr1|6 years ago|reply
Ronald Reagan, the actual president at the time, did apologize a few days after the event.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1988/07/06/r...
If you really want to compare the two events, note that after ~4 hours after the event the US did acknowledge it had shot down the airline. While it did to continue to maintain it wasn't in the wrong, there's a stark difference between that & the multi-day denial of Iran.
[+] [-] papermachete|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mthoms|6 years ago|reply
I'll leave it to more informed commenters here to discuss whether or not such a thing actually exists. But regardless, it's an interesting watch.
https://youtu.be/lRJnumxuHwY
And before someone pounces, I'm not bringing this incident up due to any ideological "anti-US" agenda or some such silliness. I just think the doc is interesting, relevant, and worthy of discussion.
[+] [-] tunesmith|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cjbprime|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nkurz|6 years ago|reply
The main argument against this interpretation is that Iran would have no reason to intentionally shoot down an innocent airliner. I don't know that this is true. One theory is that there were people on the plane they wanted dead even at significant cost in embarassment. This doesn't seem impossible. Another theory is that they shooting was done intentionally by a faction trying to make Iran look bad, and Iran decided that calling it a mistake was less embarrassing than calling it treason or mutiny.
Anyway, my point isn't that there is necessarily some deeper conspiracy, only that it may still be too early to claim that the initial conspiracy theory was entirely correct, or offers a full explanation.
[+] [-] chrononaut|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ekianjo|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] burfog|6 years ago|reply
1. bomb on the aircraft
2. missile strike
3. collision with an aircraft larger than a hobby drone
4. metal fatigue
5. evil in the cockpit
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] avocado4|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seibelj|6 years ago|reply
It’s nuclear weapons. One wrong “Oops!” by the military and the entire world self-destructs in mutually assured annihilation. Absolutely depressing.
[+] [-] grp000|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chime|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sebazzz|6 years ago|reply
But indeed, the biggest bug of them all is us, humanity.
[+] [-] perl4ever|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] api|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] haditab|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] serf|6 years ago|reply
One likes to think that automatic missiles should be fairly accurate and confident in their assessments.
My question i've wondered : was the sensitivity deliberately set very high so as to provide counter-attacks no matter what? If that's the case, isn't it more than accidental?
[+] [-] thelittleone|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nl|6 years ago|reply
Edit: the voting behavior of this is pretty extreme, but I don't even know why. Do people think it isn't good they admitted it? Or is it simply "Iran should never get credit for anything"? Or is it "of course they had to" (which is clearly not the case, as the MH17 and initial denials around the shoot down of Korean Air 007 and Iran Air 655 shows)
[+] [-] awb|6 years ago|reply
They denied it up until a few hours ago even after the video evidence first dropped. After a bunch of countries said they had intelligence that it was shot down they walked back their story.
[+] [-] tomjen3|6 years ago|reply
In addition I don't want to credit anybody with doing anything good as it is related to harming civilians. Nothing Iran can do related to that plane should in any way reflect anything but negatively on them, unless they can undo the shooting.
At this point we should seriously ban Anti-Air technology, it has already killed more people in peace time than nukes.
[+] [-] Gatsky|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] IfOnlyYouKnew|6 years ago|reply
Iran, under pressure, made a mistake. An accident happens. I don't see how one assigns some score to these events, yet your comments reads like "they deserve a few more assassinations and maybe a bit of bombardment for being so stupid as to show nerves when attacked by the fragile masculinity of a superpower in decline".
[+] [-] omilu|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sbmthakur|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dilap|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AnimalMuppet|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throw7|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] tus88|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aaron695|6 years ago|reply
But we don't punish for not stating correct conclusions when things happen.
Which seems to be a fault in the way things work.
People who go with cowardice, of lets not talk to soon, or don't speculate, or just tow official lines rule. It's why we had Weapons of Mass Destruction. It's why Science has the replication issues. It's not a small thing.
[+] [-] mola|6 years ago|reply
If we start punishing ANYONE with a speculation regarding ANY situation, we'll end up both punishing everyone, and be swamped with uninformed noise.
we do punish informed and knowledgeable people when they don't speak up, this is usually the basis for negligence law suits.
[+] [-] loquor|6 years ago|reply