Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Military United States Build

US Sentinel Drone Fooled Into Landing With GPS Spoofing 647

Posted by timothy
from the here-droney-droney-droney-droney dept.
McGruber writes "Following up on the earlier Slashdot story, the Christian Science Monitor now reports that GPS spoofing was used to get the RQ-170 Sentinel Drone to land in Iran. According to an Iranian engineer quoted in the article, 'By putting noise [jamming] on the communications, you force the bird into autopilot. This is where the bird loses its brain.' Apparently, once it loses its brain, the bird relies on GPS signals to get home. By spoofing GPS, Iranian engineers were able to get the drone to 'land on its own where we wanted it to, without having to crack the remote-control signals and communications.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Sentinel Drone Fooled Into Landing With GPS Spoofing

Comments Filter:
  • by Aldhibah (834863) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:48PM (#38389320)

    You mean the CIA has been actively trying to halt the nuclear weapons program of a nation who is opposed to the United States? Surely you jest!

  • nice hack (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sebastopol (189276) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:48PM (#38389324) Homepage

    putting aside allegiances for a moment and looking at this from a purely engineering standpoint: bad ASS!!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:48PM (#38389334)

    So, the Iranians admit to spoofing GPS positions and this *isn't* used as an excuse to say 'the Iranians tricked it into crossing the border'? Color me impressed.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:49PM (#38389342)

    So, first of all, this is just really neat. It sounds like something that would happen in a movie. That's some movie-hacker shit right there.

    That aside, the thing that really worries me here is that the military's GPS was able to be spoofed in the first place. One would think that the GPS the military relies on would be encrypted or something, y'know? How difficult is it to spoof military GPS?

  • Re:nice hack (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MozeeToby (1163751) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:53PM (#38389414)

    I have my doubts... no aviation system should rely solely on one data point for navigation. GPS is good, but easily jammed, counting on it in a military situation is questionable. The story would also imply that the Iranians cracked the encryption that military grade GPS uses, which would be far more concerning than merely losing a stealth drone. Until I hear otherwise, I'll have to doubt that the drone has no inertial navigation, VOR navigation, or compass & dead reckoning system.

  • by TheCarp (96830) <sjc@cGINSBERGarpanet.net minus poet> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:54PM (#38389450) Homepage

    Or crashed near some homes and self destructed while some kids were dragging it home.

  • by DriedClexler (814907) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:56PM (#38389494)

    With apologies to Under Siege 2:

    The US government is spying on Iran's nuclear ambitions. We (Americans and Iranians) know about the spying. And they know that we know. But we make-believe that we don't know, and they make-believe that they believe that we don't know, but know that we know.

    Everybody knows.

  • by Erik Noren (926115) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @04:58PM (#38389522) Journal
    There's no secret or trick to it - you just broadcast the same way as a GPS sat (the protocol is well documented) and since the broadcast is local, it's more powerful than Satellites. People use GPS jamming devices to get out of paying tolls in the US - that's just broadcasting noise on the right channel. Spoofing is more refined - broadcasting actual offsets in the right channel. Really, military grade equipment should use some inertial tracking as well to prevent sudden-location shifts common with spoofing. But hindsight, weight limitations, etc.
  • by Fluffeh (1273756) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:03PM (#38389616)

    So, the Iranians admit to spoofing GPS positions and this *isn't* used as an excuse to say 'the Iranians tricked it into crossing the border'? Color me impressed.

    When Coke originally changed the recipe and then had to do a LOT of backpedalling to restore the original flavour (and get the sales back), the CEO made a wonderful comment on the whole thing. People were accusing Coca Cola of doing this on purpose to drive sales. Keough answered this speculation by saying "We're not that dumb, and we're not that smart".

    I think this can very much also apply to this situation. The US government wasn't dumb enough to openly admit to spying and the like, but they weren't smart enough to concoct your excuse before the cat was out of the bag.

  • Re:nice hack (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Strudelkugel (594414) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:04PM (#38389644)

    putting aside allegiances for a moment and looking at this from a purely engineering standpoint: bad ASS!!

    My guess is that the real story behind this incident is very different from what we might be getting from any source.

  • Re:nice hack (Score:4, Insightful)

    by obarthelemy (160321) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:04PM (#38389646)

    Start by firing the persons from the US who *didn't* think of it ?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:05PM (#38389670)

    FTA:

    "We all feel drunk [with happiness] now," says the Iranian engineer. "Have you ever had a new laptop? Imagine that excitement multiplied many-fold."

  • by rabtech (223758) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:09PM (#38389748) Homepage

    I'm surprised that it didn't have some sort of dead-reckoning or inertial system as a backup in such cases. If the dead-reckoning says "whoa, it is physically impossible for you to be anywhere NEAR where you think you are so ignore the GPS, go on inertial" ...

    You forget that these things are designed by bloated defense contractors. These are the same people that were caught transmitting unencrypted video signals from spy drones that enemies were recording OTA.

    It wouldn't shock me in the slightest if it really was that easy to hijack the drone. It also wouldn't shock me that they didn't build-in any destruct safe-guard that erases all software, blow all fuses, and use the battery to burn the internals. In fact wrapping an Li-ion polymer pack around the control board then purposely putting the battery into overload to make it catch fire seems a reasonable way to handle it. Have it listen for a short encrypted destruct packet over shortwave that is encrypted with a one-time pad so they can blast the destruct signal at high power and have it bounce all over the world. I'm quite sure you could make it incredibly difficult to block that simple short destruct signal.

    Of course you must remember that it would be highly beneficial for Iran to claim they brought it down on purpose. Why you would tell your enemy how you did it publicly is beyond me.

  • by jd (1658) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {kapimi}> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:10PM (#38389762) Homepage Journal

    Halting would be one thing, but the reality is that the CIA started off trying to prevent Iran restarting a nuclear weapons program that had already been halted, then it moved to trying to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons in a couple of decades that it would not likely be able to ever deliver. It is now trying to stop Iran having deliverable nuclear weapons in two years.

    The assassinations, sabotage of equipment and virus infestations have led to a massive increase in Iran's investment and a net acceleration of the program.

    As halting goes, this is a total, unmitigated disaster beyond all possible imagining. Doing absolutely nothing at the start would have been sounder policy, based on data available. Doing bugger all once the program had started would still have given us ten years WE DON'T HAVE ANYMORE.

    Whatever lunatic thought up the program needs their head examined because this is the kind of absolute failure of intelligence (and wits) plus absolute failure of strategy that has led to the US spending $1tn on achieving bugger all in the Middle East this past decade. $1tn we taxpayers have to fork up. $1tn we don't have, won't have and will never have because we're going to now be pulled into another $1tn disaster. WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY ANYMORE, EITHER!

    Doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity, and by that standard half of CIA HQ should be locked up in a padded cell. This is inexcusable stupidity beyond all comprehension.

  • by Bugs42 (788576) <superjambob&gmail,com> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:11PM (#38389798)

    A compass and some accelerometers(or even a view of the sun and an RTC) are a lousy substitute for the accuracy of GPS; but they do provide a sanity check that could keep you going in approximately the right direction, at least enough to hard-land somewhere nominally friendly, if GPS cannot be trusted...

    It's almost certain that this drone DOES have an inertial navigation system - the problem is, how do you know when to use it? The way they usually work is that the navigation system computes two solutions: a hybrid GPS/INS solution to use most of the time, and a backup inertial-only solution. The inertial-only solution doesn't get used by the flight computers unless GPS is out entirely or there's some other very obvious problem. If you spoofed a GPS signal with real coordinates and slowly guided it away, how could the nav system see there's something wrong?

  • Re:Iraq? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jd (1658) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {kapimi}> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:11PM (#38389804) Homepage Journal

    Iraq is a suburb of Iran, thanks to an ill-advised, expensive, badly-planned and utterly botched invasion that rivals only Operation Market Garden in the degree of utter failure.

  • by ironjaw33 (1645357) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:12PM (#38389830)

    I'm surprised that it didn't have some sort of dead-reckoning or inertial system as a backup in such cases. If the dead-reckoning says "whoa, it is physically impossible for you to be anywhere NEAR where you think you are so ignore the GPS, go on inertial" ...

    This reminds me of a cruise ship running aground [ieee.org] because a GPS antenna came unhooked. The crew was supposed to use LORAN to verify the GPS every hour, but they didn't.

    In some ways, the US may have learned just as much from this as the Iranians. Losing one unmanned aircraft to learn of a serious exploit that has implications far beyond drones might not be such a bad result.

  • Re:nice hack (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jd (1658) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {kapimi}> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:13PM (#38389838) Homepage Journal

    Probably the same guy in India the US military outsourced the design and construction of GPS to.

  • by sbrown123 (229895) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:13PM (#38389846) Homepage

    You mean the CIA has been actively trying to halt the nuclear weapons program of a nation who is opposed to the United States?

    Maybe a better, simpler solution is to build good relations with those who oppose you? This current strategy doesn't seem to be working very well and looks like it will only end with lots of people getting killed.

  • The US Military (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Cheech Wizard (698728) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:25PM (#38390048)
    The United States spends more on military toys and the US military in general than *all* of the other nations in the world *combined* (which includes Russia and China). Yet, as was shown in Viet Nam, as was shown in Iraq, and is being shown in Afghanistan, the US military, with all its high tech toys, can be defeated by simple, low-tech (and cheap) devices made up of 25 bucks of Radio Shack parts. The US military has it's "eye on the ball", yet it continues to over estimate its power and the effectiveness of its toys. Trillions of US dollars down the drain every year for military toys and invasions of other countries which pose absolutely no threat to the US, and for what? A false sense of security at best.
  • by jd (1658) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {kapimi}> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:35PM (#38390254) Homepage Journal

    One small correction -- at least one of the assassinated scientists turned out to be a theoretical quantum mechanics lecturer with no skills or knowledge applicable to the type of nuclear science relating to weapons technology. So basically they're not killing nuke scientists, they're killing scientists in the hopes of killing nuke scientists.

  • You mean the CIA has been actively trying to halt the nuclear weapons program of a nation who is opposed to the United States?

    Maybe a better, simpler solution is to build good relations with those who oppose you? This current strategy doesn't seem to be working very well and looks like it will only end with lots of people getting killed.

    Building good relations with Iran probably wouldn't go over very well, given the results in the past when the US has "built good relations with Iran". Avoiding screwing things up like the US has historically done would be a good first step, however. Working to remove the label of "international power-hungry bully" from the non-domestic US branches of government would also help. Until this happens, Iran's not going to trust the US further than it can throw a sandal.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:53PM (#38390530)

    Oh Puleese! Hindsite is always 20-20. When you come up with some predictions about future actions MAYBE we will listen to you but you're just picking all the bad things that have happened and saying "I told you so"

  • by AmiMoJo (196126) <{ten.3dlrow} {ta} {ojom}> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:54PM (#38390542) Homepage

    The best thing would be for Israel is disarm. All the time they have nukes pointed at Iran you can bet that Iran will be developing it's own. The only solution is for both countries to agree to disarm and allow independent inspections to make sure they do.

    Since Israel will never do that you can bet that Iran will have nukes sooner or later, probably sooner. Because the US keeps talking about military intervention they are busy making ICBM rockets too, and again the only way to prevent having them aimed at the US is to get Israel to disarm first.

    Unfortunately at this point I don't think there is much you can do about North Korea, that boat has sailed.

  • by sd4f (1891894) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @05:57PM (#38390588)

    I'm no pilot, so i don't know for certain, but i think they have protocols in case of this, if their instrumentation has an external outage, like GPS failure, they'll still have other instruments which can be used, less accurately, and with cumulative error, but they can still calculate where they are with some precision, if the GPS comes back online and tells them something drastically different, the pilots will no doubt start checking things, and they'll probably radio to somewhere else to get checked out on radar.

    The whole reason that the iranians, if what they say is true, were able to do this is because the software in the drone didn't think of that happening, and was too easy to fool, whereas a trained pilot, will be far less so, because even underneath all that training, if their gps says that they're in one place, and then goes out for a bit, and then comes back and says they're somewhere really far away, a person will know that something is wrong, and will then check to see what is reliable and what isn't.

  • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:10PM (#38390774) Journal

    Except for the People. Let's make sure the People know, and things will unravel.

    Frankly, if you are an American citizen, and you seriously thought that your government is not spying on Iran (including covert missions on their territory) up until that whole drone story, you are naive to the extreme, and should probably abstain from voting or otherwise participating in politics.

  • by sdguero (1112795) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:17PM (#38390872)
    How is the United States supposed to build "good relations" with this kinda crap?
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8022125/Mahmoud-Ahmadinejad-his-outlandish-quotes.html [telegraph.co.uk]
  • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:18PM (#38390882)

    ...build good relations with those who oppose you?

    Sure, let's get our diplomatic mission in Iran right on that. Oh yeah, they were all taken hostage and the embassy trashed. Well, maybe Iran has changed their policy on embassies... oops, the UK can testify that is not the case.

  • by MiniMike (234881) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:19PM (#38390890)

    Of course, most non-idiots have known for some time that the CIA and Mossad have been in a state of undeclared war with Iran for several years now--assassinating their best nuke scientists and engineers, spying on their facilities, helping fund the Green movement, releasing Stuxnet and other viruses aimed at sabotaging them. etc., etc.

    Not to justify any of that, but you make it sound one-sided. Iran is well known as a state sponsor of terrorism [about.com]. Don't gloss over the fact that Iran has a government run by evil people who horribly oppress their own population, and would love to destroy the population of other countries too. The US and Israel are just first on their list, but the list does not end there.

    the same people who believe the Pakistani government when they claim they had no idea Osama Bin Laden was in that compound in Abbottabad and that they're still our good friends

    I don't think anybody actually believes that, even if they have to act as if they do.

  • by pdxer (2520686) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:31PM (#38391044)

    Maybe a better, simpler solution is to build good relations with those who oppose you?

    You neatly summarize Polish foreign policy in the 1930s.

  • MONUMENTAL BLUNDER (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15, 2011 @06:40PM (#38391130)

    If the Iranians cleverly caused one of our most sophisticated stealth drones to land where they wanted it to -- in undoubtedly one of the neatest thefts in the digital age -- then the laughter in their command center upon receiving Barach Obama's request for its return must have been thundering. What's the Farsi equivalent of "Say what dude?" The genius of this theft is that the Iranians didn't really need to know where the stealth drone was for sure perhaps because the stealthiness was probably effective; they just needed to suspect that a drone was flying at a certain time in order to pull off their experiment ... which probably to their immense surprise, actually WORKED. Shame on our Pentagon and/or CIA for YET AGAIN underestimatinng the smarts, resolve, wherewithal, and luck of our enemies. Who would have thought that something so precious and expensive could be so easily compromised? Somebody needs to be ass-whipped and then fired because of this arrogant stupidity. How long before our enemies' copies of these stealthy drones are flying over the U.S. in preparation for some kind of incursion? What a f..king monumental blunder!

  • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:20PM (#38391608)

    Iran was innocent when the CIA first got involved but these days they are playing the game with the big boys and getting what they deserve (as is the CIA).

    That is my favorite quote of this /. story. It reminds me a little of the War of 1812. We had some provocation, but declaring war on the British Empire while the US had poor military leadership, resources and preparation turned out to be a bad idea.

  • So, they spoofed GPS, jammed the drone's communications, then convinced it to land with the spoofed GPS coordinates. That's awesome.

    Then, uhhh, why exactly did you guys have the kids from the Tehran High school football team and pep squad make up banners to hide the undercarriage?

    Don't get me wrong. Both sides have plenty invested in having their own version of the story be the authoritative version, and the odds of the general public finding out the truth any time this decade are infinitesimal at best. But what we've been shown doesn't currently support the "we made it land on its own because we're fucking badass and the Americans suck" theory. It supports the "we don't want you to see what the underbelly looks like, also, we're lousy artists" theory. The iranians might have brought it down, and it might have crashed on its own while inside Iranian borders. "Proof" is in short supply at the moment.

  • Re:Iraq? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jd (1658) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {kapimi}> on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:42PM (#38391886) Homepage Journal

    How was the invasion successful? It failed on every one of its objectives (it allowed Al Queda not only in but to steal vast quantities of RDX other high explosives, it failed to capture or eliminate Saddam Hussein, it caused the total fragmentation of international resolve, it destroyed massive quantities of infrastructure - a violation of Sun Tzu's instructions, it broke the Middle East stalemate between Iraq and Iran, it succeeded in killing figures who would have been useful in rebuilding).

    It also caused widespread looting -- not only by Iraqis, as US soldiers plundered substantial amounts of archaeological relics from Babylon. Since history is a valuable resource and cannot be replaced, destruction of it by the invasion force substantially damaged Iraq's capacity to rebuild. Something the US troops who looted knew damn well at the time. I will accept no excuses and believe firmly that no forgiveness should ever be given for those who raped such sites.

  • by kheldan (1460303) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @07:47PM (#38391950) Journal
    One way that immediately comes to mind, would be to have the GPS receiver detect jamming/spoofing attempts by tracking satellite S/N ratio. If it suddenly goes up, or goes higher than a predetermined threshold, then you've got fake GPS data incoming. In other words, you use the fact that GPS satellite signals are so weak to begin with, and therefore harder to spoof in that regard.
  • by Luckyo (1726890) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:04PM (#38392126)

    They seem to have perfectly fine relations with Saudi Arabia?

    Also, you do know that most of his "outlandish quotes" are usually either purposefully mistranslated, or ripped massively out of context?

  • by Luckyo (1726890) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:05PM (#38392146)

    Because you know, US and EU are in dire threat of being conquered by rising economic and military might of Iran. Awesome comparison.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:16PM (#38392250)

    As countless examples have shown "peace time" military engineering is crap and rarely takes account of a realistic risk asesment.

    See Navy nuclear till Admiral Hyman G. Rickover took hold, nothing worked reliably.

    Inertial 3 axis accelerometers are now often built into SoC or GPS chips and any such machine must have a compass,as well.

    Using the inertial and compass should have a really very good dead reckoning guess, and when the GPS diverged it should have added to the ALARM caused by the lack of uplink and its hearbeat. Within seconds of the loss of uplink control the drone should have gone retrograde and headed for home plate.

    The contractor and project manager should be sued.

    All communications, without exception should be encrypted, with one mission keys if necessary.

    Complexity, and the desire for the Perfect is, as always, the enemy of the good and reliable.

  • by zrakoplovom (1938894) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:37PM (#38392442)

    Being "nice" to nations can do wonders. After all, we turned Japan, our mortal enemy in WW2... on whom we dropped two atomic weapons

    So your definition of being "nice" to a country is to nuke them... Got it. The bombing begins in five minutes...

  • by yuje (1892616) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:45PM (#38392536)

    He may be nutty, but how many aggressive actions has Iran actually performed in the last hundred years?

    Much is made of Ahmadinejad and his supposed nuttiness and his Holocaust denial, but what has he actually done. Iran actually has a large Jewish population minority the largest of any Muslim country. Much is made of his supposed threat to Israel, but Iran hasn't invaded any country in the last century and more, whereas Israel has invaded all of its neighbors on several occasions and even annexed land in just the last 50 years, and the US has invaded two of Iran's neighbors. Iran is building nuclear reactors where Israel and the US already has them. Why can Pakistan, which actively supported the Taliban, and terrorists in India, and harbored bin Laden, allowed to legitimately own nukes (and is even a US ally) while Iran can't even have reactors?

    As for supporting terrorism? All but one of the 9/11 hijackers were from either Saudi Arabia or Egypt, the US's supposed allies. There hasn't been a single instance of an Iranian suicide bomber anywhere. Iran however, was invaded jointly by the UK and Soviet Union in World War 2 to provide a seaport for shipping supplies to Russia. The US deposed its former democratically elected President in the 1950s. When the despotic Shah was deposed, and Iraq invaded Iran, the US actively supposed Iraq, and weapons of mass destruction (poison gas) were used against the Iranians, while the US at best turned a blind eye, and at worse, aided and abetted Iraq. During said war, the US shot down an Iranian civilian airliner and to this day refuses to apologize for the incident. And now, Iran is suffering from sabotage of its facilities and assassinations of some of its smartest scientists.

    Or did you have the silly impression that bad relations were solely because of the current Iranian president, or that all the bad blood came solely from the Iranian side?

  • by yuje (1892616) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @08:53PM (#38392618)

    Iran, too has been invaded before. Iraq invaded Iran within living memory and attempted to annex and wipe out Iran (Hussein cited the original Muslim invaders of Persia as rallying cries for his invasion). In doing so, Iraqi troops performed acts of brutality, and WMDs (supported by the US) against both military and civilian targets, as well as engaging in terror bombing.

    Why isn't it acceptable for Iran to say "Never again" and defend itself against neighbors that would see Iran destroyed? (Also keeping in mind that iran hasn't engaged in any aggressive actions or invasions against her neighbors since the 18th century or so, while Israel has bombed and invaded all of its neighbors at some pont, and its most recent war happened in only 2006.

  • by perryizgr8 (1370173) on Thursday December 15, 2011 @10:30PM (#38393522)

    some of those don't seem so 'outlandish':

    On Osama bin Laden – May 2010

    "I heard that Osama bin Laden is in Washington DC ... Yes, I did. He's there. Because he was a previous partner of Mr Bush. They were colleagues in fact in the old days. You know that. They were in the oil business together. They worked together. Mr bin Laden never co-operated with Iran but he co-operated with Mr Bush."

    and

    On Paul the Octopus, who 'predicted' the result of World Cup matches – July 2010

    "Those who believe in this type of thing cannot be the leaders of the global nations that aspire, like Iran, to human perfection, basing themselves in the love of all sacred values."

    also,

    On George W Bush – June 2008

    "This wicked man desires to harm the Iranian nation."

    all those are quite true, as everyone knows.

  • by Xest (935314) on Friday December 16, 2011 @05:07AM (#38395436)

    "(Also keeping in mind that iran hasn't engaged in any aggressive actions or invasions against her neighbors since the 18th century or so, while Israel has bombed and invaded all of its neighbors at some pont, and its most recent war happened in only 2006."

    You were doing pretty well until this point.

    Iran has been carrying out proxy wars funding, training, and arming groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and parts of the Iraqi and Afghan insurgency for years now.

    The whole reason Lebanon has been so close to being a thriving secular democracy but then repeatedly fallen into chaos and civil war is because Iran and Syria love to have a puppet army on Israel's doorstep and recognise they need to destabilise the legitimate military and government of that nation to achieve their goals, because Lebanon's secular, legitimate government and military has never been interested in carrying out Iran's war for it.

    Don't try and pretend they're innocent, they're a major destabilising force in the middle east, because whilst they don't directly invade foreign nations, they play the game of proxy war as well as the CIA ever has. You've got to be pretty naive to think otherwise.

    Whilst I completely disagree with Israel's actions relating to the Palestinians, it betrays your real agenda when you complain of Israel invading it's neighbours. Let's not forget that more often than not this is because it's neighbours have tried to invade it, but unfortunately for them Israel pushed back and won. Here's a thought experiment for you - if Egypt, Syria, et. al. had succesfully invaded Israel, would you still be sat here calling it the bad guy? I'm not convinced invading a foreign nation to stop it invading you is necessarily a bad thing. Certainly things are much more stable between the likes of Egypt, Jordan, Israel etc. than they were back then.

    Look, hate Israel for what they've done to the Palestinians all you want - I'd agree with you there, but to then go to the extreme of pretending Iran is some magical, innocent, ultra-friendly nation, and it's Israel's fault entirely? That's just dumb, ignorant, and naive.

If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong. -- Norm Schryer

Working...