|
Please guys, stay on topic.
This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. |
On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. And they also travel really fast while the missile reaches them too.
|
On November 25 2015 04:00 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 03:58 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:53 AngryMag wrote:On November 25 2015 03:47 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:45 AngryMag wrote:On November 25 2015 03:22 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:16 zeo wrote:On November 25 2015 03:14 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:10 zeo wrote:On November 25 2015 02:53 Gorsameth wrote: [quote] We don't know when Turkey engaged the Russian plane. They started warnings well before it reached the Turkish border so it is possible they engaged while it was in Turkish airspace.
As for your other comment. There was no need for the aircraft to enter Turkish space, It was warned repeatedly and following previous incidents Turkey summoned the Russian ambassador and told him the next incursion would be met with force.
If things transpired as Turkey claims then they were entirely within their right to shoot the plane down. The truth might come from another nations radar if they picked it up or else the fighters blackbox flight data. However if that shows Turkey in the right I ofc expect Russia to never release it. Maybe I should jog your memory a bit about some reactions when a Turkish aircraft was shot down for violating Syrian airspace: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18584872 The article mentions nothing about warnings being given. A rather important distinction. If it was warned and resumed regardless then my reaction to that is the same as now, you had it coming. Why did you ommit Erdogans words out of your reply. Here, I'll type it out again for you, and bold it. "A short-term border violation can never be a pretext for an attack," he said. hint: pay close attention to the words 'short term border violation' and 'can never be a pretext' Russia repeatedly violates airspace Turkey tells the Russian ambassador next time will be met with force Russia repeats airspace violation My point remains the same. This is not an isolated incident. Would you like to estimate how often Turkey violated Greece airspace in the last year alone? Around 2000 times, yeah you read that right. Unfortunately there (again) won't be a backlash for Turkey. They got away with a lot of shit during that war, from boosting islamic nutjobs in Syria to fueling ethnic conflict within Turkey, shooting the russian plane down all the while they are busy to change the once secular Turkey into another state dominated by islam. Did I make any statements about the Turkish/Greek situation because I wasn't aware I made any. No you justified shooting a plane down over a minor violation of airspace which is flatout ridiculous. If your standards become established worldwide there will be thousands of planes shot down each year. What is right in case A must also be right in case B and shit. I am sure you are aware of that but have trouble to admit how little thought you put into your argument. That's ok just know that your line of argumentation is flawed and gladly not the international standard in these kind of disputes. repeated violations* and yes if Turkey repeatedly violated Greek airspace and despite warnings kept doing so then I would consider Greece entirely in their right to respond. Borders should be respected, especially by armed forced. That's why those things tend to be negotiated over prior to military missions that cross another countries borders. On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. Planes have speeds and momentum, missiles have travel times. exactly why what Turkey did was an act of war. You are 100% correct. But repeatedly violating a nation's boarders with military forces after being told to stop doing so is also an act of aggression. Russia was playing with fire by doing so.
|
On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. it doesn't matter. you have to shoot it and the plane has to go down in your country to not be in violation of international laws. it's why nothing happens when war planes regularly cross other countries airspace.
|
Will it even matter if Turkey was 'justified' to shoot it down, I mean no one gives a shit about the conventions and rules in this modern cold war type of conflict. I think what's more interesting is debating the consequences; Russia's response and NATO's stand on the issue
|
On November 25 2015 04:02 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. it doesn't matter. you have to shoot it and the plane has to go down in your country to not be in violation of international laws. it's why nothing happens when war planes regularly cross other countries airspace. Because they have approval to fly over from those nations, which is worked out in advance. If the US says don't send a warplane over our airspace, no one is going to do it. Russia was told to stop and didn't.
|
On November 25 2015 03:58 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 03:53 AngryMag wrote:On November 25 2015 03:47 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:45 AngryMag wrote:On November 25 2015 03:22 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:16 zeo wrote:On November 25 2015 03:14 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 03:10 zeo wrote:On November 25 2015 02:53 Gorsameth wrote:On November 25 2015 02:36 zeo wrote: [quote] Going after and shooting at an aircraft that is still in your airspace is understandable if it doesn't want to leave.
But following an aircraft that was in your airspace for under 10sec into another country (many km away from your own border) and shooting it down is wrong whichever way you look at it. Do you think the US never violated Iran's airspace during their war in Iraq?
We don't know when Turkey engaged the Russian plane. They started warnings well before it reached the Turkish border so it is possible they engaged while it was in Turkish airspace. As for your other comment. There was no need for the aircraft to enter Turkish space, It was warned repeatedly and following previous incidents Turkey summoned the Russian ambassador and told him the next incursion would be met with force. If things transpired as Turkey claims then they were entirely within their right to shoot the plane down. The truth might come from another nations radar if they picked it up or else the fighters blackbox flight data. However if that shows Turkey in the right I ofc expect Russia to never release it. Maybe I should jog your memory a bit about some reactions when a Turkish aircraft was shot down for violating Syrian airspace: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18584872 The article mentions nothing about warnings being given. A rather important distinction. If it was warned and resumed regardless then my reaction to that is the same as now, you had it coming. Why did you ommit Erdogans words out of your reply. Here, I'll type it out again for you, and bold it. "A short-term border violation can never be a pretext for an attack," he said. hint: pay close attention to the words 'short term border violation' and 'can never be a pretext' Russia repeatedly violates airspace Turkey tells the Russian ambassador next time will be met with force Russia repeats airspace violation My point remains the same. This is not an isolated incident. Would you like to estimate how often Turkey violated Greece airspace in the last year alone? Around 2000 times, yeah you read that right. Unfortunately there (again) won't be a backlash for Turkey. They got away with a lot of shit during that war, from boosting islamic nutjobs in Syria to fueling ethnic conflict within Turkey, shooting the russian plane down all the while they are busy to change the once secular Turkey into another state dominated by islam. Did I make any statements about the Turkish/Greek situation because I wasn't aware I made any. No you justified shooting a plane down over a minor violation of airspace which is flatout ridiculous. If your standards become established worldwide there will be thousands of planes shot down each year. What is right in case A must also be right in case B and shit. I am sure you are aware of that but have trouble to admit how little thought you put into your argument. That's ok just know that your line of argumentation is flawed and gladly not the international standard in these kind of disputes. repeated violations* and yes if Turkey repeatedly violated Greek airspace and despite warnings kept doing so then I would consider Greece entirely in their right to respond. Borders should be respected, especially by armed forced. That's why those things tend to be negotiated over prior to military missions that cross another countries borders. Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. Planes have speeds and momentum, missiles have travel times.
Great job, you just started WWIII over nothing. Ten thousands of airspace violations each year would result in thousands of planes shot down each single year if we establish "your" rules, one of these incidents would surely escalate far enough to trigger a huge ass conflict. Your ego stands in the way of seeing sense and just admit that your initial point is nonsense and far from realistic to implement in the real world, whatever
|
I am just glad we all see Turkey for the country that it is.
Turkey does not belong with the west. Turkey invaded Cyprus. Turkey aids jihadis. Turkey is aiding ISIS.
Turkey, a part of NATO, decides to go loose cannon and shoot down a Russian warplane in Syria to protect Turkey's jihadis. Amazing time we are living in.
|
My theory is that this is more of a proxy war than is being let on. Russia's bombers aren't targeting ISIS, they are targeting regime opponent rebels. But Turkey has been supporting the regime opponent rebels (good reason to think Turkish nationals are amongst the rebels). I think Turkey shot this plane down to send a message to Russia: stop bombing our rebels.
|
On November 25 2015 04:03 Warfie wrote: Will it even matter if Turkey was 'justified' to shoot it down, I mean no one gives a shit about the conventions and rules in this modern cold war type of conflict. I think what's more interesting is debating the consequences; Russia's response and NATO's stand on the issue
NATO will only do a bit of rethoric, I would bet my left nut that no one in the NATO is even remotely happy with Ankara's actions in the last years. They are still important because of geostrategic stuff regarding the mideast and that is why they get away with a lot of bullshit but no NATO member will get itself drawn further into the conflict just because Ankara's temper tantrums and strong man rethoric. They are hellbent on getting rid of Assad and exploit NATO for that (after boosting islamic nutjobs didn't yield the desired results), it won't happen and NATO won't let itself get drawn into a conflict with Russia
|
Turkey has no obligation to allow Russia to repeatedly violate its airspace despite requests and warnings to stop. If Turkey has to shoot down a Russian jet for failing to respect their airspace then it is Russia's fault. I feel sorry for the airmen who were involved though.
The Soviet Union shot down many American planes during the Cold War for airspace violations and it never started a world war. Suggesting that Turkey defending its airspace will start one is silly.
|
On November 25 2015 04:04 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 04:02 xM(Z wrote:On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. it doesn't matter. you have to shoot it and the plane has to go down in your country to not be in violation of international laws. it's why nothing happens when war planes regularly cross other countries airspace. Because they have approval to fly over from those nations, which is worked out in advance. If the US says don't send a warplane over our airspace, no one is going to do it. Russia was told to stop and didn't. i'm not excusing the russians. they played in on the fact that turks could only half-ass the shooting of russian war planes, but saying Turkey was 100% right/justified in their action is stupid.
|
On November 25 2015 04:11 CannonsNCarriers wrote: My theory is that this is more of a proxy war than is being let on. Russia's bombers aren't targeting ISIS, they are targeting regime opponent rebels. But Turkey has been supporting the regime opponent rebels (good reason to think Turkish nationals are amongst the rebels). I think Turkey shot this plane down to send a message to Russia: stop bombing our rebels. Its amazing how Turkey got a Russian pilot to violate their airspace so they could shoot him down. Especially considering they explicitly warned Russia this would happen if they continued.
Was Turkey happy to take the opportunity? Maybe but Russia handed it to them on a silver platter.
|
On November 25 2015 04:14 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 04:04 Plansix wrote:On November 25 2015 04:02 xM(Z wrote:On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. it doesn't matter. you have to shoot it and the plane has to go down in your country to not be in violation of international laws. it's why nothing happens when war planes regularly cross other countries airspace. Because they have approval to fly over from those nations, which is worked out in advance. If the US says don't send a warplane over our airspace, no one is going to do it. Russia was told to stop and didn't. i'm not excusing the russians. they played in on the fact that turks could only half-ass the shooting of russian war planes, but saying Turkey was 100% right/justified in their action is stupid. Very few acts of violence are 100% justified or right. But this is what happens when nations are as cocky as Russia has been lately. At some point someone pushes back and lights your shit up. People have forgotten that this is how a lot of nations used to enforce their boarders. We used to be way more trigger happy back in the 60-70-80s.
And Cannon's has it right that there is a proxy war going on. Turkey doesn't support Assad and assisting the rebels fighting him. And Russia isn't fighting ISIS like it claims and everyone knows it.
|
And Russia could have continued that proxy war with impunity, it just had to not violate Turkish airspace while doing so.
|
On November 25 2015 04:17 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 04:14 xM(Z wrote:On November 25 2015 04:04 Plansix wrote:On November 25 2015 04:02 xM(Z wrote:On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. it doesn't matter. you have to shoot it and the plane has to go down in your country to not be in violation of international laws. it's why nothing happens when war planes regularly cross other countries airspace. Because they have approval to fly over from those nations, which is worked out in advance. If the US says don't send a warplane over our airspace, no one is going to do it. Russia was told to stop and didn't. i'm not excusing the russians. they played in on the fact that turks could only half-ass the shooting of russian war planes, but saying Turkey was 100% right/justified in their action is stupid. Very few acts of violence are 100% justified or right. But this is what happens when nations are as cocky as Russia has been lately. At some point someone pushes back and lights your shit up. People have forgotten that this is how a lot of nations used to enforce their boarders. We used to be way more trigger happy back in the 60-70-80s. And Cannon's has it right that there is a proxy war going on. Turkey doesn't support Assad and assisting the rebels fighting him. And Russia isn't fighting ISIS like it claims and everyone knows it. i know, i said something similar in the previous page"... russians were bombing FSA, turkmen or whatever militias you have there, which were supported by Turkey...". still, some rules of engagement were broken. the future of warfare in that zone will definitely change.
|
Just read in Polish news: 1)Military response -bombings will continue with assists from fighter jets. Russian will shot down any POTENTIAL threats to their machines. 2)Russia terminates any military coordination with Turkey immediately. 3)There will be other non military consequences not specyfied yet.
Now the ball is on Turkey's side again, will they attempt to engage Russian jets when (eventualy) they cross their border again?
|
Ofc there won't be any kind of retaliation, cause what is exactly Russia supposed to do? Look scarry? Worked on Ukraine that was shattered, won't work on a country that have professional, well trained and equiped army.
Russians jets won't cross shit.
|
On November 25 2015 04:14 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2015 04:04 Plansix wrote:On November 25 2015 04:02 xM(Z wrote:On November 25 2015 04:00 zlefin wrote:On November 25 2015 03:57 xM(Z wrote: can you even grasp the idea that the plane went down in Syria not in Turkey?. that doesn't mean it wasn't shot while in Turkey. Planes go pretty fast, they can crash quite aways from where they're hit. it doesn't matter. you have to shoot it and the plane has to go down in your country to not be in violation of international laws. it's why nothing happens when war planes regularly cross other countries airspace. Because they have approval to fly over from those nations, which is worked out in advance. If the US says don't send a warplane over our airspace, no one is going to do it. Russia was told to stop and didn't. i'm not excusing the russians. they played in on the fact that turks could only half-ass the shooting of russian war planes, but saying Turkey was 100% right/justified in their action is stupid. Even if everyone believe's Turkeys story about the 1,4 miles of airspace the ground attack aircraft 'violated' we are expected to believe that in those 10 seconds a Turkish fighter jet was informed the target had entered Turkey, got authorisation from Ankara, informed the SU-24 that they will be shot down and fired that missile... all in 10 seconds...
Anyway the Russian MOD put out a statement that anyone threatening Russian military aircraft during anti-terrorist operations will be destroyed. They have deployed the cruiser Moskva with the AA system 'Fort' (similar to the S-300) and it will be doing the destroying.
Russian MOD map:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lUKIqOy.jpg)
This has been confirmed by the Syrian Air Defence. No attempt was made by the Turkish aircraft to contact the SU-24, it was stuck by a missile in Syrian territory and fell 4km from the border.
|
this just sounds like the expected response. what it basically means is that russia will stay away from the turkish border because russia can not engage a fight against turkish fighters even close to turkish airspace without risking a military response from nato and on the other side turkey can not risk shooting down a bunch of planes in syrian airspace because that means they potentially lose a lot of support of nato.
|
On November 25 2015 04:27 Silvanel wrote: Just read in Polish news: 1)Military response -bombings will continue with assists from fighter jets. Russian will shot down any POTENTIAL threats to their machines. 2)Russia terminates any military coordination with Turkey immediately. 3)There will be other non military consequences not specyfied yet.
Now the ball is on Turkey's side again, will they attempt to engage Russian jets when (eventualy) they cross their border again?
I guess it depends on what daddy NATO says behind closed doors. Their will be support rethoric for the public surely, but this isn't necessarily the same as what gets said behind closed doors.
I guess they won't as NATO states have no interest to escalate the conflict with Russia further. The rebels Russia bombs have proven to be rather ineffective to get rid of Assad and the focus might have shifted more towards getting rid of the islamic state (no one on NATO side cared about their rampage in Syria in 2011-2013).
|
|
|
|
|
|