Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: 176 dead in Tehran plane crash

  1. #1

    Default 176 dead in Tehran plane crash

    https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/l...hnk/index.html

    Conspiracy theories and tragedy notwithstanding, this is a bad look for Boeing. Both 737 NG and max may also have a major wiring issue. The airline I fly with most often uses Boeing planes, I think from those generations, and I'm getting pretty nervous about flying with them now.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  2. #2
    At this point, it's 50/50 whether the plane went down due to an accident or something else. Need to see more evidence.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  3. #3
    It would be ridiculous odds that during a time of very heightened Iranian air defense alert that this plane just happened to malfunction.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    It would be ridiculous odds that during a time of very heightened Iranian air defense alert that this plane just happened to malfunction.
    Sadly coincidences do happen and Boeing don't have a great track record at the minute. Plus Tehran is nowhere near the military actions of that night.

    Though it happening in Iran may provide enough smoke to help Boeing avoid exposure in the court of public opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  5. #5
    Boeing's reputation is saved, possibility of huge PR crisis for Iran rising:

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51055219

    https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena...ranian-suburb/

    Obv needs much more corroboration.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  6. #6
    Planes explodes, happens spontaniously. :P

    Here is another one: (~same)
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/video/iran-plane-missile.html

  7. #7
    Iran kills 1500 protesters
    Have 50+ people die in a funeral
    Shoots down civilian aircraft with 150+ people

    That country is a basket case.

  8. #8
    Pretty fucking negligent not to ground civilian flights in their airspace while their air defences are in hair trigger mode.
    Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponry
    You can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the air
    Every move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attack
    You push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Shoots down civilian aircraft with 150+ people
    Yeah, what kind of shithole does that
    Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponry
    You can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the air
    Every move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attack
    You push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    Yeah, what kind of shithole does that
    For shoot-downs with 100+ casualties, the list in descending chronological order from before today is Russian-oriented separatists in the Ukraine, Abkhazi separatists in Georgia (technically this was multiple smaller planes attacked but it was a concerted effort over four days), the US Navy, the Soviet Air Force, and the Israeli Air Force. The Russians tried for a double with KAL 902, but most of the passengers and crew survived that crash-landing.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  11. #11
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,996
    Arguably the Russians got the double in Ukraine.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  12. #12
    Tragic :-/

    Obviously someone f*ed up.
    Says alot about Irans infrastructure and tactical abilities (they obviously suck).

    And WTF flies over this area soon after a rocket attack?!

  13. #13
    Iran admitted shooting down the airliner.

    That's new.
    Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponry
    You can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the air
    Every move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attack
    You push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

  14. #14
    The UK ambassador to Iran was arrested during anti-government protests in Tehran after officials admitted shooting down a passenger plane.

    Rob Macaire was held for three hours, in what the UK described as a "flagrant violation of international law".


    It is understood he was attending a vigil for those who died in the crash, which turned into a protest.


    He left to make his way back to the UK embassy, but was arrested as he stopped at a barber shop for a haircut.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51077897

    Who the fuck attends, in their capacity as UK ambassador, a vigil for the dead/protest against the Iranian government in the middle of Tehran during a time of crisis and just randomly stops in for a haircut on the way back to the embassy? That's just weird, that is.
    Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponry
    You can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the air
    Every move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attack
    You push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51077897

    Who the fuck attends, in their capacity as UK ambassador, a vigil for the dead/protest against the Iranian government in the middle of Tehran during a time of crisis and just randomly stops in for a haircut on the way back to the embassy? That's just weird, that is.
    What is it with liberals bending over backwards to try to blame anyone other than Iran. How about asking what kind of country arrests people for getting a fucking haircut?

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by rille View Post
    Tragic :-/

    Obviously someone f*ed up.
    Says alot about Irans infrastructure and tactical abilities (they obviously suck).
    I'm not sure that's really true. The US Navy shot down a civilian airliner in the 80s, as have the Russians, Israelis, Bulgarians (!), Cubans, Ukrainians (not just the separatists), and more. Sometimes it's a case of mistaken identity (as in the case of the USN and the recent Iranian shootdown), sometimes it's a case of a plane straying into restricted airspace and not responding to orders. It's not super uncommon.

    Yes, there were a lot of failures that had to occur for this to happen, but the IRGC is not uniquely incompetent. Their handling of the optics in the aftermath was supremely incompetent, however.

    And WTF flies over this area soon after a rocket attack?!
    A good question might be why regular commercial flights were going to Iran at all in the context of the extremely high likelihood of some sort of military attack in the wake of Soleimani's killing. But as to that specific timing, I'm not even sure if civil aviation authorities in Iran knew that the IRGC had launched a strike, let alone that Iranian air defenses were on high alert. Absent a wholesale recalibration of risk tolerance on the part of airlines, I think it's not necessarily clear that the airliners (or civil aviation authorities) were really being all that foolhardy.
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    11,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51077897

    Who the fuck attends, in their capacity as UK ambassador, a vigil for the dead/protest against the Iranian government in the middle of Tehran during a time of crisis and just randomly stops in for a haircut on the way back to the embassy? That's just weird, that is.
    In this part of the world it is not considered that weird.
    Trump: Lock him up.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    What is it with liberals bending over backwards to try to blame anyone other than Iran. How about asking what kind of country arrests people for getting a fucking haircut?
    Oh, do be quiet. I wasn't blaming him, just making an observation that that's a bit of a random time to get a haircut.

    Say, what is with conservatives being so obsessed with their pre-conceived ideas about liberals liking Americas enemies that they keep coming back to it, even in the most tenuously connected circumstances? Is it because you all have, like, 6 ideas between you?
    Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponry
    You can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the air
    Every move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attack
    You push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

  19. #19
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  20. #20
    He shouldn't have said that part out loud, but it's not exactly exceptional to have a president's foreign policy decision be "influenced" by political considerations. I think it's also safe to say that a Rubio presidency might have actually been more disastrous than a Trump presidency.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    He shouldn't have said that part out loud, but it's not exactly exceptional to have a president's foreign policy decision be "influenced" by political considerations. I think it's also safe to say that a Rubio presidency might have actually been more disastrous than a Trump presidency.
    Short of Rubio opening the gates to Hades I'm not sure how that's possible.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Short of Rubio opening the gates to Hades I'm not sure how that's possible.
    An occupation of Venezuela and Iran.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    He shouldn't have said that part out loud, but it's not exactly exceptional to have a president's foreign policy decision be "influenced" by political considerations.
    Further it's a bit disingenuous to try and get upset for THAT reason when if he'd chosen to take a less drastic option because he didn't want to rock the political boat domestically we'd think of it as a rare and welcome bit of wisdom and restraint.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  24. #24
    I think the revelations in the first article are more concerning, but the reports in the second article are more embarrassing - for suggesting that a corrupt crook is justified in his belief that he can buy his jurors, alternatively that individual legislators can blackmail the president - personally - into making specific, very significant foreign policy decisions.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I think the revelations in the first article are more concerning, but the reports in the second article are more embarrassing - for suggesting that a corrupt crook is justified in his belief that he can buy his jurors, alternatively that individual legislators can blackmail the president - personally - into making specific, very significant foreign policy decisions.
    Impeachment isn't a typical trial its purely 100% political. Otherwise all those petitions and people/ads asking people to contact their congress critter to vote for impeachment or "hold Trump accountable" would be potentially on the hook for bribery and jury tampering. But they aren't since it is a political process.

  26. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    11,193
    Did anyone catch anything about the Supreme Leader expressing regrets? I felt like they were trying to not really accept responsibility by letting the President take care of it.
    Trump: Lock him up.

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Impeachment isn't a typical trial its purely 100% political.
    This is a half-truth. Impeachment is a political process and, to a large extent, a political remedy, but it also has a legal purpose - esp. in this situation, where the President has asserted immunity from both investigation and prosecution. The standard against which a president's alleged misconduct must be measured, in an impeachment trial, is a legal standard. Were this not the case, you would expect the impeachment of every single president to have governed while Congress was led by the opposing party; instead, you see the House impeaching or attempting to impeach only those presidents who arguably violated the constitutional standard against which their misconduct was measured. Impeachment trials do not have the character of a purely political process; there is at least a semblance of adherence to apolitical principles/standards (eg. articulation of the standards of evidence one has used, a separate oath affirming commitment to doing impartial justice under the Constitution and federal statutes, etc). At most you can say that impeachment is a hybrid process, but, again, partly with a legal purpose.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    This is a half-truth. Impeachment is a political process and, to a large extent, a political remedy, but it also has a legal purpose - esp. in this situation, where the President has asserted immunity from both investigation and prosecution. The standard against which a president's alleged misconduct must be measured, in an impeachment trial, is a legal standard. Were this not the case, you would expect the impeachment of every single president to have governed while Congress was led by the opposing party; instead, you see the House impeaching or attempting to impeach only those presidents who arguably violated the constitutional standard against which their misconduct was measured. Impeachment trials do not have the character of a purely political process; there is at least a semblance of adherence to apolitical principles/standards (eg. articulation of the standards of evidence one has used, a separate oath affirming commitment to doing impartial justice under the Constitution and federal statutes, etc). At most you can say that impeachment is a hybrid process, but, again, partly with a legal purpose.
    I agree except for the Congress led by the opposing party part - because the supermajority threshold required by the Senate means mere control isn't sufficient - plus the line of succession meaning that the President is replaced by the Veep from his own party typically would also mean its not the norm.

    Politics and law can mix. The idea they're completely separate is a modern fallacy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    I agree except for the Congress led by the opposing party part - because the supermajority threshold required by the Senate means mere control isn't sufficient - plus the line of succession meaning that the President is replaced by the Veep from his own party typically would also mean its not the norm.

    Politics and law can mix. The idea they're completely separate is a modern fallacy.
    Anything not written into the law cannot be implied. What I mean is that the constitution gives the power to the senate to try the president.

    "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. "

    Meaning that whatever happens in a normal court room has no bearing in what goes on in the Senate trail. The traditional court procedural processes do not apply. The senate can choose by flipping a coin if the super majority agreed to it.

  30. #30
    Lewk, Aimless and Rand are right -- impeachment isn't 100% political (as you claimed) but a hybrid mix of politics & law. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over any presidential impeachment trial. It might be a symbolic role but it still matters constitutionally.

    Talk about thread drift...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •