LOL @ Bing

Lol, that isn't evidence.
It's not even secret like they suggest.
I haven't missed the point at all.
Wow a drone base not being near a massive highway, who would have thunk.

It's not a secret base like they suggest, it's not unknown use like they suggest. It is on google maps.
There is zero evidence for us.

I think you have very much missed the point.
 
Lol, that isn't evidence.
It's not even secret like they suggest.
I haven't missed the point at all.
.

That is the point that you've completely missed... the fact an airbase exists is irrelevant, the Saudi's have plenty, the construction firm can post a construction project on its website all it likes. If you're going to fly drones in the middle east, north Africa etc.. then you'll tend to use existing facilities... what you don't necessarily want is for photos of predator hangers to appear on internet mapping software.... as it kind of gives the game away that that particular base is being used by the USA, to fly drones.... something that is rather a sensitive issue in Saudi Arabia.
 
No, I have not missed a point at all. You from the start have made unfounded assumptions.

Predator hangers are they? Clam shell /= predator
It's a drone base.
The predator is also licensed to be sold to saudi arabi.


So no, where's you evidence.


This has all come about as we know there's a base some where. And someone's gone "secret" without doing any reserch, Several of the reports say its secret. It clearly isn't. And others say oh no it's not on google maps. Despite the name tag.
1+2 doesn't equal 4; there's a missing link, of anything showing an Us involvement.


And if you read on this is all circumstantial and rubbish. Seeing as we know ho had the contract, when it was built and by whom.
“I believe it’s the facility that the U.S. uses to fly drones into Yemen,” one officer says. “It’s out in eastern Saudi Arabia, near Yemen and where the bad guys are supposed to hang out. It has those clamshell hangars, which we’ve seen before associated with U.S. drones.”

The former officer was also impressed by the base’s remote location.”It’s way, way out in the Rub al Khali, otherwise known as Hell, and must have been built, at least initially, with stuff flown into Sharorah and then trucked more than 400 kilometers up the existing highway and newly-built road,” the ex-officer adds in an e-mail. “It’s a really major logistics feat. The way it fits inconspicuously into the terrain is also admirable.”

Three airstrips are visible in the pictures; two are big enough to land drones or conventional light aircraft. A third runway, under construction, is substantially longer and wider. In other words: The facility is growing, and it is expanding to fly much larger planes.
The growth has been rapid. When the commercial imaging company Digital Globe flew one of its satellites over the region on Nov. 17, 2010, there was no base present. By the time the satellite made a pass on March 22, 2012, the airfield was there. This construction roughly matches the timeline for the Saudi base mentioned in the Post and in the Times.

“It’s obviously a military base,” says a second intelligence analyst, who reviewed the images and asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitivity of the subject. “It’s clearly an operating air base in the middle of nowhere, but near the Yemeni border. You tell me what it is.”

And that analyst needs to be sacked, more people with the secret stuff.


As that article says it is to small to be seen with satelite images, so it needs an aircraft picture. Google and bing are missing many areas from their maps.
 
Last edited:
lol

/me backs out of own thread .................

7RZ47h4.gif
 
This has all come about as we know there's a base some where. And someone's gone "secret" without doing any reserch, Several of the reports say its secret. It clearly isn't.

That's the point I'm getting at - the fact that the air station itself isn't secret is completely irrelevant, your link to the construction firm doesn't demonstrate anything about the validity or not of the story re: possible use of the air station, by the USA for drones - that's the part that would generally be kept under wraps, not the fact that there is an air station in x location.
 
That's the point I'm getting at - the fact that the air station itself isn't secret is completely irrelevant, your link to the construction firm doesn't demonstrate anything about the validity or not of the story re: possible use of the air station, by the USA for drones - that's the part that would generally be kept under wraps, not the fact that there is an air station in x location.

It shows it isn't secret(which is what the report, analyst, security officer etc are all saying) it shows the officer is clueless, it shows the analyst can't use google.

You haven't shower one shread of evidence.

A clam shell hangar does not make it a predator(even if it is a predator, saudi can buy them, so unless you can identify between an armed and non armed version it doesn't tell us anything even if there was pictures), an analysts going "tell me what it is" does not make it secret. Why is the analyst ignoring the documentation of it being a Drone border guard station, with the build dates exactly matching the official version.

Yours and their powers to ignore detail is stunning.
 
It shows it isn't secret(which is what the report, analyst, security officer etc are all saying) it shows the officer is clueless, it shows the analyst can't use google.

The existence of an air station in foreign country != secret
The presence of a US drone base at some air station in some foreign country = secret

link to a construction firm showing that x air station isn't secret = irrelevant
 
Link to anything showing its a secret us base. You haven't and can't.

All you can't link to is stuff like in the OP.
That is full of errors and unnamed "analysts" who haven't even done a google search. They haven't even looked on google maps and typed in the name.


That's the entire point, there's is zero linking them together.
At least give me something, that isn't filled with plot holes.

We know there's a base, that's nothing new. I need at least a shread of something, before accepting that's the one being used. So far there's hasn't been anything. Apart from errors and misinformation.

It's far from irrelevant when the article is based on a security officer and analyst going we have no idea this place existed or what it would be used for other than as an Us base. Well that link kills both of their statements cold. So it is very relevant indeed, to this thread.
 
Last edited:
It's far from irrelevant when the article is based on a security officer and analyst going we have no idea this place existed or what it would be used for other than as an Us base. Well that link kills both of their statements cold. So it is very relevant indeed, to this thread.

Its utterly irrelevant. Do you honestly expect there to be a website declaring that X air station will be used by the USA for secret drone attacks etc...?
 
Its utterly irrelevant. Do you honestly expect there to be a website declaring that X air station will be used by the USA for secret drone attacks etc...?

Not at all.

I just want something that suggest this is it.
What do we know so far?

That the report is based on an officer and an analyst. Which we know know don't know what they are talking about.
It's also based on clam shell hangars, that doesn't make them predator and even if it is, doesn't make them US predators unless they are armed.
That google maps doesn't have it on, despite the name tag and its to small to be seen from satelite imagery, so could easily be a gap in aircraft photos, which exist all over the place.

So what in your opinion is the evidence, how ever remote linking these two sites together?
Or is it the crap interviews of people who clearly know nothing.

That article and the other dozen or so articles are all based on the assumption that this base was secret and unknowns about. Which is just 100% false. From there it only gets worse in there non researched assumptions. I mean FPS, google maps even tells you what it is but apparently some analyst can't finger out what it is. Remember he didnt say its supposed to be a drone boarder base but xyz doesn't fit. He simply had no clue what he was talking about.

What sense is there supposedly forcing google to remove pictures, but not the name tag. That makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Who cares where they are launching the drones from? It had to be somewhere nearby as they don't have a massive range really.

Must be a slow news day.
 
Back
Top Bottom