EPTIraq & Syrian Civil Wars - Page 336
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Please guys, stay on topic. This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
| ||
|
Reaps
United Kingdom1280 Posts
On November 25 2015 07:12 Ghostcom wrote: Russia has multiple times violated sovereign nations airspace - Swedish in September, Danish in March (I believe it was), Japan claims it has happened 6 times. The Russian air force is either really fucking bad at reading maps and "containing itself to international airspace" or they are needlessly provocative. Whilst it would have been a lot better had the plane not been shot down, Russia is very much to blame due to the precedence they themselves have set. Multiple times in the last few months UK had to send fighter jets to escort Russian warplanes (including a bomber) away from British airspace. | ||
dfs
Russian Federation4050 Posts
I understand how politics related discussions work, but this "It's their own fault" stuff gets weirder and weirder with every event. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 25 2015 07:37 dfs wrote: To be fair, you can't just go "oh fuck it, we've had enough, shut it down with no warning, their own fault". I understand how politics related discussions work, but this "It's their own fault" stuff gets weirder and weirder with every event. I don't see how that's relevant, since it was given ample, repeated warnings. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
On November 25 2015 06:19 zlefin wrote: do you have a citation for this? As far as I can tell, you have to shoot it when it's within your country; but if the plane then teeters for awhile and crashes elsewhere, it's still ok. i rephrased it here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/203676-iraq-and-syrian-civil-wars?page=334#6677 but if the missile you shot enters another country's airspace, it can be taken as: In 1974, General Assembly Resolution 3314 defined and gave some examples of aggression. Article 3 gave, as examples, invasion or attack by armed forces of a state, military occupation, bombardment against the territory of another state, blockade of ports or coasts, action of a state in allowing its territory to be used for preparing an act of aggression against a third state, and the sending of armed bands, groups, irregulars, or mercenaries to carry out acts of armed force against another state. | ||
|
Twoflowers
Germany241 Posts
On November 25 2015 07:45 xM(Z wrote: i rephrased it here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/203676-iraq-and-syrian-civil-wars?page=334#6677 but if the missile you shot enters another country's airspace, it can be taken as: shooting down a plane is not a bombardment. | ||
|
_Animus_
Bulgaria1064 Posts
Instead they criticise Russia for helping the legitimate government of Syria stating in indirect way, that they want isis to grow and kill Syria and they dont want Russia to interfere. Im not surprised at all by this statement, its the same verse they using from the start of that conflict. As always NATO wants conflicts and what better one than a world war, what a dickheads. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/10/12/NATO-chief-urges-Turkey-to-be-proportionate-in-response-to-attacks.html BTW The bomber was empty and was returning from a mission, this cant be a threat to turkey in any way. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21853 Posts
On November 25 2015 07:37 dfs wrote: To be fair, you can't just go "oh fuck it, we've had enough, shut it down with no warning, their own fault". I understand how politics related discussions work, but this "It's their own fault" stuff gets weirder and weirder with every event. Several weeks ago, Turkey told Russia that further incursions in their airspace would be met with force According to reports this pilot may have been warned as many as 21 times. There was nothing even remotely close to "no warning" involved here. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 25 2015 07:45 xM(Z wrote: i rephrased it here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/203676-iraq-and-syrian-civil-wars?page=334#6677 but if the missile you shot enters another country's airspace, it can be taken as: I see, thank you for the info. It could certainly be mistaken for a bombardment, and cause problems. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21853 Posts
On November 25 2015 08:52 Salazarz wrote: Whole thing had nothing to do with Turkish airspace and everything to do with Turks being upset about Russia supporting Assad, it's kind of obvious. Pretty silly that NATO is still putting up with Turkey's antics, considering Cyprus, Kurds, etc but hey, as long as relations between Russia and the West remain crap, NATO will happily put up with any bullshit from anyone who is willing to be a pain in the ass for the Russkies. It's almost as if the Cold War didn't go anywhere. Can I have this copy of Turkish mind control technology they used to make a Russian pilot ignore (reportedly) 21 warnings and enter Turkish airspace despite warnings from Turkey weeks ago they would shoot down further incursions? | ||
|
dfs
Russian Federation4050 Posts
On November 25 2015 08:23 Gorsameth wrote: Several weeks ago, Turkey told Russia that further incursions in their airspace would be met with force According to reports this pilot may have been warned as many as 21 times. There was nothing even remotely close to "no warning" involved here. According to our MOD reports, he wasn't warned once. Obviously our MOD won't just go "yeah, they've warned him, he ignored it and flipped them off". Obviously their reports won't just go "yeah, we've destroyed a military jet of a country we're not at war with without a proper warning, because fuck you". Either way, why would he ignore 21 warnings while leaving the airspace anyway? "Met with force" doesn't mean "destroyed on sight" either. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21853 Posts
On November 25 2015 08:55 dfs wrote: According to our MOD reports, he wasn't warned once. Obviously our MOD won't just go "yeah, they've warned him, he ignored it and flipped them off". Obviously their reports won't just go "yeah, we've destroyed a military jet of a country we're not at war with without a proper warning, because fuck you". Either way, why would he ignore 21 warnings while leaving the airspace anyway? "Met with force" doesn't mean "destroyed on sight" either. I eagerly await the reveal of the black box flightpath. I expect we will never see it tho for obvious reasons. | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On November 25 2015 08:57 Gorsameth wrote: I eagerly await the reveal of the black box flightpath. I expect we will never see it tho for obvious reasons. black box? In case you didn't notice: This was a military jet, not a civilian airliner. | ||
|
dfs
Russian Federation4050 Posts
On November 25 2015 08:57 Gorsameth wrote: I eagerly await the reveal of the black box flightpath. I expect we will never see it tho for obvious reasons. Yeah, remember that black box investigation of the UKR passanger plane? That went so well. In the end it matters none to anyone but the families of people who died. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21853 Posts
On November 25 2015 09:01 mahrgell wrote: black box? In case you didn't notice: This was a military jet, not a civilian airliner. My knowledge of military aircraft is not the greatest I will admit. I assume it records flight data somewhere that will allow an independent verification. Otherwise nothing will come of this anyway as it is Russia vs NATO in a he says/she says | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On November 25 2015 08:54 Gorsameth wrote: Can I have this copy of Turkish mind control technology they used to make a Russian pilot ignore (reportedly) 21 warnings and enter Turkish airspace despite warnings from Turkey weeks ago they would shoot down further incursions? The plane also 'reportedly' spent 5 minutes in Turkish airspace. Hey, guess what, Turkey is 'reportedly' funding ISIS-related terrorist groups, maybe we should nuke them because you know, 'reportedly' stuff happens. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On November 25 2015 09:04 Gorsameth wrote: My knowledge of military aircraft is not the greatest I will admit. I assume it records flight data somewhere that will allow an independent verification. Otherwise nothing will come of this anyway as it is Russia vs NATO in a he says/she says There is enough information about the plane's flight path and potential targets in the area. | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On November 25 2015 09:15 Salazarz wrote: There is enough information about the plane's flight path and potential targets in the area. Oh, please tell us those info! There is a Turkish radar plot that nobody can verify and a cute Russian version, that looks like their trainee created it in paint. Then of course we have the Americans who nod to everything Turkey says in the matter and Syria doing the same regarding everything Russia says. But you seem to know the truth! Enlighten us! @Gorsamath Military jets on combat missions usually prefer to not give unnecessary intel in case they are downed (most likely in hostile territory)... So they do not carry black boxes or anything similar for flighttracking. | ||
| ||
