Replies

Not to defend Obama if this article is true. But personally, I need a little more evidence that the destruction of the drone either before or after the landing was feasible. Design-wise I'm sure that in-the-air destruction was built in and with backup systems to make sure they could do it with very high reliability. But Murphy's Law sometime comes into play.

A couple of other things: One, the idea that Iran took control of this vehicle is simply nonsensical. The links may be jammable with enough power but the control signals would be highly encrypted and even with Russian help the Iranians could not control that aircraft. And they didn't shoot it down or it wouldn't still be in one piece. So it simply failed.

And the prospects for a successful Special Ops move on the downed drone seem problematic to me. Big disadvantage for the good guys in that kind of an operation. I doubt if the Generals would have recommended it.

Bottom line: Destroy in the air. If Obama could have and didn't that is treason pure and simple.

Design-wise I'm sure that in-the-air destruction was built in and with backup systems to make sure they could do it with very high reliability.

That was not one of the three options.

Obama Rejected Numerous Proposals to Retrieve Lost U.S. Drone: Officials Confirm Authenticity of Iranian TV Images Showing Drone
Among the options the U.S. considered were sending in a special-ops team to retrieve the drone; sending in a team to blow up the aircraft; and launching an airstrike to destroy it.

It is not likely that there are self-destruct mechanisms on our drones precisely because of Murphy's Law. They could put in a system to fry the electronics but that just makes one more system to go wrong and drop a drone where they don't want it. It doesn't destroy the composites the airframe are made of either and that's one of its secrets.

It is even less likely that they would rig it with high explosives to totally destroy it. That would make it dangerous for our ground crews to work with. It would also add significant weight to a vehicle that they have done everything possible to make as light as possible.

I listened to an interview today with retired General McInerney. If you''re not familiar with him, here's his profile: General McInerney is the founder of Government Reform Through Technology, a consulting firm that works with high-tech companies. GRTT conducts business with federal, state, city and local governments to help them introduce advanced technology into the public sector.
Prior to this, he was the CEO and the president of Business Executives for National Security, a national, nonpartisan organization of business and professional leaders.
For 35 years, General McInerney served as a pilot, commander, and strategic planner in the U.S. Air Force.
He retired from military service as Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force and Director of the Defense Performance Review, reporting to the secretary of defense. He led the Pentagon's Reinventing Government effort, visiting more than 100 leading-edge commercial companies to assimilate their ideas about business re-engineering.

General McInerney graduated from the United States Military Academy and earned a master's degree in international relations from George Washington University. He also attended the Armed Forces Staff College and National War College.

He stated that the drone landed on a runway inside Iran, and that he suspected that, somehow, control of the drone was hijacked. That's pretty hard to imagine.

My opinion is that we should have done everything possible to destroy this thing, even if we had to bomb it on the ground. The Chief Executive was afraid to do this, fearing it would be construed an act of war. I agree with the poster who said we need a President who has a pair..