Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
DarkHunter

Aramco facilities on fire in Saudi Arabia

384 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Manwon Lender
4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

People have raised some very interesting points in the last dozen posts. One thing puzzles me though. 

Let's assume - for the moment - that Iran DID "sponsor" these attacks. By this, I mean that they may not have launched the missiles themselves, but they provided the hardware and the training for a non-state actor to do so. They must surely have known that the missiles don't entirely disintegrate into vapour when they strike a target: they leave bits behind. Bits that can be identified. There is also a high probability that at least ONE of the missiles would malfunction, and could be captured whole. 

Either their military command is a complete bunch of morons, which I doubt, or they simply didn't CARE that they would be identified as being complicit in the attack. 

And what does THAT tell us ? 

That they are ready to go to war, if attacked. I think another question is who will support them?

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
6 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Tactically it does make sense, Saudi air defense is mostly pointed south towards Yemen or east towards Iran with the rest around areas Saudi Arabia seems critical like its capital, flying in north over Kuwait would allow Iran to avoid most of Saudi Arabia's air defense network as was deployed at the time. 

Thats illogical. Why should Iran route CMs/drones via Kuwait which is a pro-Saudi country?

Quote

... the pac 3 (...) is only suitable for use against ballistic missiles,

^^^Thats incorrect.

Quote

About Patriot

Patriot is the world's most capable air and missile defense system, providing protection against a full range of advanced threats, including aircraft, tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles. It is the system of choice for 12 nations around the globe.

Raytheon Homepage

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
1 minute ago, toast said:

Thats illogical. Why should Iran route CMs/drones via Kuwait which is a pro-Saudi country?

^^^Thats incorrect.

 

 

The Missiles were routed over Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

I don't believe that the Iranians have a cruise missile that can travel several hundreds of miles, and hit the LPG tanks with the precision that those photographs imply. 

Something is really.. odd.. about this whole thing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
11 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

The Missiles were routed over Iraq.

Possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
2 minutes ago, toast said:

Possible.

Here is what the New York Times is reporting.

One theory gaining traction among American officials is that the cruise missiles were launched from Iran and programmed to fly around the northern Persian Gulf through Iraqi air space instead of directly across the gulf where the United States has much better surveillance, one senior official said. In the hours before the attacks, American intelligence detected unusual activity at military bases in southwest Iran that would be consistent with preparations for strikes, another senior American official said.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
2 minutes ago, toast said:

Thats illogical. Why should Iran route CMs/drones via Kuwait which is a pro-Saudi country?

Cause Saudi Arabia has no patriot missile system radar pointed at Kuwait and Kuwait was not expecting drones and missiles to be flying over their country from Iran.

2 minutes ago, toast said:

^^^Thats incorrect

You really need to do better research.

First from wikipedia

"The PAC-3 upgrade carried with it a new missile design, nominally known as MIM-104F and called PAC-3 by the Army. The PAC-3 missile evolved from the Strategic Defense Initiative's ERINT missile, and so it is dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic missile mission"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot

"The PAC-3 system can defend against ballistic missiles of all types, however it is less effective against aircraft and air-to surface missiles. This is why it is deployed alongside the Patriot PAC-2 launchers with long-range missiles."

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/patriot_pac3.htm

Ultimately there is a reason pac 2 and pac 3 patriot missile systems are often grouped together, pac 2 targets aircraft/drones/cruise missiles and pac 3 targets ballistic missiles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
2 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Cause Saudi Arabia has no patriot missile system radar pointed at Kuwait and Kuwait was not expecting drones and missiles to be flying over their country from Iran.

You really need to do better research.

First from wikipedia

"The PAC-3 upgrade carried with it a new missile design, nominally known as MIM-104F and called PAC-3 by the Army. The PAC-3 missile evolved from the Strategic Defense Initiative's ERINT missile, and so it is dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic missile mission"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot

"The PAC-3 system can defend against ballistic missiles of all types, however it is less effective against aircraft and air-to surface missiles. This is why it is deployed alongside the Patriot PAC-2 launchers with long-range missiles."

http://www.military-today.com/missiles/patriot_pac3.htm

Ultimately there is a reason pac 2 and pac 3 patriot missile systems are often grouped together, pac 2 targets aircraft/drones/cruise missiles and pac 3 targets ballistic missiles.

The missiles and Drones were to low to be detected and the systems were not scanning North.

heres a link. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/19/how-did-attack-breach-saudi-defences-and-what-will-happen-next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
16 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

You really need to do better research.

First from wikipedia

"The PAC-3 upgrade carried with it a new missile design, nominally known as MIM-104F and called PAC-3 by the Army. The PAC-3 missile evolved from the Strategic Defense Initiative's ERINT missile, and so it is dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic missile mission"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot

"The PAC-3 system can defend against ballistic missiles of all types, however it is less effective against aircraft and air-to surface missiles. This is why it is deployed alongside the Patriot PAC-2 launchers with long-range missiles."

My research is quite well and your post confirm what I`ve stated earlier: PAC3 is a defense system against CMs and drones as well, as stated on the HP of the PAC3 OEM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Well, I think the quibbling over PAC2 vs PAC3 is somewhat moot, seeing as NOT radar system apparently detected this attack ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
6 minutes ago, toast said:

My research is quite well and your post confirm what I`ve stated earlier: PAC3 is a defense system against CMs and drones as well, as stated on the HP of the PAC3 OEM.

You guys are kinda beating a dead horse, the Missiles and Drones were too low for detection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
8 minutes ago, toast said:

My research is quite well and your post confirm what I`ve stated earlier: PAC3 is a defense system against CMs and drones as well, as stated on the HP of the PAC3 OEM.

Maybe its cause English is not your first language but on the Raytheon page they were clearly talking about patriot missiles in the general, meaning pac 2, pac 2/GEM, pac 3, and paac 4, not just the pac 3 in particular 

Edited by DarkHunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, I think the quibbling over PAC2 vs PAC3 is somewhat moot, seeing as NOT radar system apparently detected this attack ? 

The missiles and Drones were too low to be detected and the systems were not scanning North.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/19/how-did-attack-breach-saudi-defences-and-what-will-happen-next

Edited by Manwon Lender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
40 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Something is really.. odd.. about this whole thing. 

Yeah, especially the fact that the Rottweiler on cocaine at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave morphed to be a hippie minded one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
4 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

Maybe its cause English is not your first language but on the Raytheon page they were clearly talking about patriot missiles in the general, meaning pac 2, pac 2/GEM, pac 3, and paac 4, not just the pac 3 in particular 

I would say that my knowledge of the English language, which isnt my first language, is sufficient enough to understand whats written on the Raytheon HP.

Quote by you:

Quote

The PAC-3 system can defend against ballistic missiles of all types, however it is less effective against aircraft and air-to surface missiles.

Less effective against aircraft and air-to-surface missiles does not mean that the units dont pose a threat to aircraft and air-to-surface missiles in general. That all what I wanted to make clear here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Guys, can we move on from the PAC2/PAC3 issue ? As it appears that the attack was not detected by ANY radar system, it seems a trifle moot ? :) 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

So Pompeous the Great seems to be backtracking on the jowl-wobbling belligerence, then.

I was here in an act of diplomacy. While the foreign minister of Iran is threatening all-out war and to fight to the last American, we’re here to build out a coalition aimed at achieving peace and a peaceful resolution to this. That’s my mission set, what President Trump certainly wants me to work to achieve, and I hope that the Islamic Republic of Iran sees it the same way. There’s no evidence of that from his statement, but I hope that that’s the case.

https://www.state.gov/remarks-to-the-traveling-press-7/

Possibly he's worried that, if Iran was behind these drones, then it shows a rather greater capability than they'd condescendingly expected, and is worried that it might turn out a little embarrassingly for the U.S. and its "friends"? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter

The US navy now has 3 Arleigh Burke class destroyers operating in the Persian gulf while the Iranian army is moving 3 S300 units to Mahshahr in southern Iran.  Also rumors that Iran has moved more AA guns to southern Iran but that hasnt been verified yet.

Today the Secretary of Defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff apparently met to refine a list of military strike options on Iran that will be presented to Trump tomorrow.

On September 24 the UN is having its general meeting and it seems that is when Saudi Arabia and possibly America are going to present evidence globally that they believe will clearly implicate Iran in the attack. 

Last night the French foreign secretary said that the attack didnt come from Yemen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
1 hour ago, DarkHunter said:

it seems that is when Saudi Arabia and possibly America are going to present evidence globally that they believe will clearly implicate Iran in the attack. 

:rofl: We've all seen their evidence that implicates [insert name of current Regime we're trying to overthrow here] haven't we. Who can forget that tiny little hole in the ground into which two people on a motorbike (neither of them wearing so much as a scarf over their mouth) looking at it that was the smoking gun proof that Syria's Mad Monster Assad had dropped chlorine gas on innocent civilians (but not however, on a hospital, which is where he usually bombs.) And then there was the other time when he dropped a tank of chlorine gas right through the roof of - was that a hospital? It may have been, and placed it very carefully right on someone's bed! :angry: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
17 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

It is the Us Government thats supplying most of the evidence, Saudi Arabia is calling for cooler heads and for not going to war. It's kinda strange, they were attacked and it appears they don't want any retaliation at this time. I think this a wait and see situation, but I think that the US will throw the first punch. I really don't understand why Trump wants to start something, when no US Soldiers were attacked.

If we decline to act at all, again, and they strike yet another target to apply pressure to world markets they'll be doing it to bring pressure to drop the sanctions.  My guess is they'll continue to escalate until they either get a war to distract their people or they get a U.S. government to cave to them and their nuclear ambitions.  Those who deny they have such ambitions are ignoring clear evidence and they can be ignored IMO.  A nuclear Iran that starts making demands in that region will not be someone that can be argued with.  We'll either bow to them or risk a nuclear confrontation.  

If you don't believe that then that's your choice.  It doesn't make it any more accurate than mine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
2 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

:rofl: We've all seen their evidence that implicates [insert name of current Regime we're trying to overthrow here] haven't we. Who can forget that tiny little hole in the ground into which two people on a motorbike (neither of them wearing so much as a scarf over their mouth) looking at it that was the smoking gun proof that Syria's Mad Monster Assad had dropped chlorine gas on innocent civilians (but not however, on a hospital, which is where he usually bombs.) And then there was the other time when he dropped a tank of chlorine gas right through the roof of - was that a hospital? It may have been, and placed it very carefully right on someone's bed! :angry: 

Why not just admit that no evidence will be trustworthy if it proves Iran to be at fault?  It's easier, takes less effort and will be believed just as quickly by others here.  Just curious...how many attacks like this would it take before you agreed that Iran needed to be stopped?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
15 minutes ago, and then said:

If we decline to act at all, again, and they strike yet another target to apply pressure to world markets they'll be doing it to bring pressure to drop the sanctions.  My guess is they'll continue to escalate until they either get a war to distract their people or they get a U.S. government to cave to them and their nuclear ambitions.

As you know perfectly well, Iran had no desire for this war until YOU reimposed sanctions without cause. 

You started this shoving match, just settle it for yourselves. If you could let the rest of us know before you start a war, that would be great. 

Otherwise, get back in your box, swallow your undeserved pride and let the grown ups get on with diplomacy. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
11 minutes ago, Setton said:

Otherwise, get back in your box, swallow your undeserved pride and let the grown ups get on with diplomacy. 

How has your diplomacy worked out for the release of the Stena Impero cause last I heard the Adrian Darya 1 made it to Syria to discharge its oil despite Iran promising it wasnt heading to Syria and the Stena Impero and 16 of the 23 crew is still detained by Iran.  Seems your diplomacy isnt really working

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

It's called diplomacy with other countries, it's sucking up when Trump does it. :rolleyes:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
41 minutes ago, DarkHunter said:

How has your diplomacy worked out for the release of the Stena Impero cause last I heard the Adrian Darya 1 made it to Syria to discharge its oil despite Iran promising it wasnt heading to Syria and the Stena Impero and 16 of the 23 crew is still detained by Iran.  Seems your diplomacy isnt really working

Could have something to do with our closest ally undermining our position and supporting a country that is actively attacking Iran. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.