Russian SU-24 - Shot Down by Turkey

dowie said:
no I've just stated a fact - we don't know whether they received the communications


do you still believe the shooting down of that jet was justified and/or that it was posing some huge threat?
Click to expand...

By not knowing something you're operating on an assumption. You are assuming the Russians never received the message. We are all aware it was broadcast.
Apart from George but bless him!

Never said it was justified. Just that it was logical and Turkey had acted within their rules of engagement which were clear and well known prior to the event. Russia must be aware of the likely results of repeated incursions in to airspace of other nations, they've shot down planes themselves for the same thing. I linked two PASSENGER flights earlier in the thread that had been downed by Russian planes for this very thing.
 
Dis86 said:
By not knowing something you're operating on an assumption. You are assuming the Russians never received the message. We are all aware it was broadcast.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

no I'm doing the opposite, read the posts again, with more care this time - I'm pointing out we don't know either way - the other poster is the one making an assumption when he claimed the broadcast is evidence the Russians lied.

Never said it was justified. Just that it was logical and Turkey had acted within their rules of engagement which were clear and well known prior to the event. Russia must be aware of the likely results of repeated incursions in to airspace of other nations, they've shot down planes themselves for the same thing. I linked two PASSENGER flights earlier in the thread that had been downed by Russian planes for this very thing.
Click to expand...

Firstly we don't know for sure it was in Turkish airspace- that is disputed, secondly even if it was then going on the Turkish account it was in it briefly for at best a few seconds and wasn't heading towards the rest of Turkey but rather skimming over a tiny bit of territory containing nothing. You spent several pages previously with naff analogies trying to justify the shooting - in reality it is just an unnecessary escalation by Turkey that has caused a big diplomatic mess.
 
Would the same people happy that it was a Russian jet still be happy if it had been a British or American jet blown out of the sky?
The Turks said they didn't know who they were shooting at...
 
Uther said:
Would the same people happy that it was a Russian jet still be happy if it had been a British or American jet blown out of the sky?
The Turks said they didn't know who they were shooting at...
Click to expand...

Happy? No, of course not. Is anybody really happy that one of these guys got killed because of this?

What a silly question to ask.
 
Evangelion said:
I don't care who you are: if you deliberately violate sovereign airspace in the vicinity of an ongoing conflict after 10 clear warnings, you deserve everything you get.
Click to expand...

Not even clear they did it deliberately, even if we assume the Turkish account is the correct one.
 
Evangelion said:
I don't care who you are: if you deliberately violate sovereign airspace in the vicinity of an ongoing conflict after 10 clear warnings, you deserve everything you get.
Click to expand...

And if you shoot down an aircraft who hasn't entered your airspace and did not recieve warnings, you deserve everything you get in retaliation.

That is not my general opinion. I just thought it was worth saying it, because still, none of this is confirmed or proven and there is still two completely different versions of the situation.
 
Evangelion said:
Evidence please. How would you even know what's happening privately in NATO? I'm curious to hear all about your extensive connections with the upper echelons of NATO staff.
Click to expand...

Because the media is reporting so? Of course they are issuing public statements of solidarity. I even quoted some of the evidence in that very post...
 
Last edited:
Hmm, still think it was a senseless escalation. Assuming the Turkish events are the accurate ones the yes, they'd see the Russian bombers close to their border and the trajectory was going to take them over it. Conversely they'd also see the trajectory was going to be taking them out of their territory (which is in the butt end of nowhere) as soon as they entered it in a matter of seconds. Cooler heads should have prevailed.

Why the Russians thought that was ok who knows? Simple error or knew they'd be in and out in seconds or just flipping the Turks off. Maybe a combination.

Yes the Turks gave warnings, but I'd assume every Russian bomber that's targeting that area would be getting numerous warnings from the Turks they are close to their territory despite not crossing any borders.

Think it's all down to the Turkish being angry with Moscow for bombing the local Turkmen groups. Doesn't help that Russia seem to insist on labelling all the rebel groups as ISIS terrorists when they clearly are not. Irony is it was to 'protect' groups within Ukraine that identified themselves as Russian that the invasion of Crimea took place and the east of the country. Russia complaining the Turks help them is a bit pot and kettle.

Anyway, as I said before I'm no fan of the way the Russians do things but in this instance Turkey was wrong. The fact the missile hit them over Syrian territory doesn't look good.

If the Russian version was true then I'm not surprised they are fuming. But then I'd take everything the Russians say with a large pinch of salt.
 
What is interesting is why? In the end the politics are all down to trade and the money at risk.

States are helping groups whose goals overlap in someway with their desires (i.e. trade or strengthen/weaken relationships).

Given the military hardware that Turkey purchase - US and others are unlikely to put that revenue at risk. If Assad is to be removed, then any group (other than groups that actively attack outside of Syria) are simply going have a bind eye turned against them (as they buy weapon too).

If Russians want to assist assad from a trade point of view then it is likely that they will be on their own and doing their own fights.. their contribution to the ISIS situation is that they extend all activities to all groups to assist Assad. If ISIS happens to be an easy target on the monday morning they may choose that - knowing it picks up brownie points. It wouldn't surprise me if the russian military leaders are itching to try out some of their non-nuclear large scale weapons but this is, unfortunately, a cherry picking exercise in helping assad.

So what about ISIS? They hate declared war on everyone.. so naturally it's open season - the funny thing is their attention weakens the targeting of assad and inversely helps assad. It's clear they work to use civilians as shields by burrowing under their houses to create bases and move between buildings. Only way to cope with that is small earthquake bombs but then that's back to the civilians again.. so focus on their funding, weaken and effectively show their army fights on money rather than religion.. let it collapse under it's own weight. Reducing their capabilities to maintain their logistics is the easiest way for surface attacks that can easily be performed outside of civilian populations.

So the turks are simply pushing their own criteria - they'd love more syrian land I suspect and may annex it once their allies have cleared the way (we're helping by rolling our tanks in).. At which point - what will saudi do?
 
Malt_Vinegar said:
We need the context of those stats in that graph! Presumably this is over a "grey" zone in the Aegean dispute? In which case, it is a totally different situation!
Click to expand...

By "grey" you mean the 6 mile round each Greek island but Turkey doesn't recognise as they claim the islands belong to them? Wouldn't that be the same as Argentina flying over the Falkland Islands?
 
Last edited:
Greebo said:
By "grey" you mean the 6 mile round each Greek island but Turkey doesn't recognise as they claim the islands belong to them? Wouldn't that be the same as Argentina flying over the Falkland Islands?
Click to expand...

Whilst I am not completely up on the technicalities of the greek/turkish situation, crossing into known disputed "grey" airspace on questionable islands is very different to actually crossing land based universally recognised and defined international borders.

So, whilst I am not justifying what Turkey have done to the Russian aircraft, I am simply saying that it cannot be compared to the Aegean situation in the way some people are doing :)
 
Malt_Vinegar said:
We need the context of those stats in that graph! Presumably this is over a "grey" zone in the Aegean dispute? In which case, it is a totally different situation!
Click to expand...

grey? status in the Aegean was established by the treaty of lausanne in 1923, ending of the war between greece and turkey. They are violating the airspace on a regular basis, to the point of it gets boring. Turkey IS the aggresor in the region and is harassing every single one neighbour country. It has commited genocides on Greeks, Armenians and is hunting Kurds mercilessly suffocating their language, their customs etc.

Give me one sensible reason why they are sending tjeir F16 inside Greece, a NATO ally country.

The turk is unreliable and their country is run by a megalomaniac who is dreaming of pax-turkana, the making of a neo-ottoman empire. Davutoglou has also published books on the issue. Turkey is not the victim here
 
Hopefully I'm not missing something here.

[Turkish President in 2012] Abdullah Gül after Syria bring down a Turkish fighter:
In an interview on Saturday, the Turkish president, Abdullah Gul, conceded that the Turkish plane may have crossed into the country’s airspace at the time. But he said there was no reason for the Syrian military to have interpreted the move as a hostile act.

“It is routine for jet fighters to sometimes fly in and out over (national) borders ... when you consider their speed over the sea,” Mr Gul told the Anatolia news agency. “These are not ill-intentioned things but happen beyond control due to the jets’ speed.”
Click to expand...

Mr Gul said: “Whatever is necessary will be done.” It was not clear if he was suggesting military retaliation, increased sanctions against Syria or other possible steps. But Faruk Celik, Turkey’s Labor and Social Security Minister, said Turkey would retaliate “either in the diplomatic field or give other types of response.”

“Even if we assume that there was a violation of Syria’s airspace - though the situation is still not clear - the Syrian response cannot be to bring down the plane,” Mr Celik said. “The incident is unacceptable,” he said. “Turkey cannot endure it in silence.”
Click to expand...

[US secretary of State in 2012] Hillary Clinton:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Sunday said she had spoken with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu about Friday's incident.

"The foreign minister briefed me on the specifics of the incident, including that the Syrian military shot its plane down without warning," Clinton said in a statement. "The United States condemns this brazen and unacceptable act in the strongest possible terms. It is yet another reflection of the Syrian authorities' callous disregard for international norms, human life and peace and security."
Click to expand...

[British Foreign Minister in 2012] William Hague:

called the incident "outrageous" and said he condemned it wholeheatedly."

"The Assad regime should not make the mistake of believing that it can act with impunity. It will be held to account for its behavior," Hague said.
Click to expand...

“A short-term border violation can never be a pretext for an attack,” Mr Erdogan said at the time, threatening in response that “every military element approaching Turkey from the Syrian border… will be assessed as a military threat and treated as a military target”.
Click to expand...

The Turkish plane entered Syrian airspace for 5 minutes, left and then came back. Not 17 seconds, 5 minutes, and was then downed outside Syrian airspace.

Seems eerily similar, except that Turkey is now the aggressor and NATO are no longer outraged at the shooting down of a plane for the same infringement, though the Russian infringement appears to be for a much shorter period.

Where is the outrage from NATO now? Where are the statements demanding that the regime in Turkey steps down, to echo those against the Assad regime? Why is it that Turkey can do what Syria did, but when Syria did it, it was an act of aggression, even war in some parts, but when Turkey does it, they are just defending themselves?

None of this even covers the other infringements that Turkey carry out on a regular and consistent basis. Russia may not be whiter than white but in this, at least, Turkey are worse than any.
 
Uther said:
Would the same people happy that it was a Russian jet still be happy if it had been a British or American jet blown out of the sky?
The Turks said they didn't know who they were shooting at...
Click to expand...

Say what now, so the pilots of the Turkish F-16's didn't identify the thing they were shooting at before they shot at it?!

Seems a bit off to me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom