|
24 Jun 12 - 09:07 AM (#3367357) Subject: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Bonzo3legs Syrian military said an "unidentified air target" had penetrated Syrian airspace from the west at 11:40 local time (08:40 GMT), travelling at very low altitude and at high speed. It said that in line with the laws prevailing in such cases, Syrian air defences engaged the craft, and scored a direct hit about 1km (0.5 nautical miles) from its coastline. Are the Syrians complete arseholes or just plain stupid? |
|
24 Jun 12 - 10:03 AM (#3367364) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: GUEST,999 Probably a bit of both, Bonzo. There is some confusion at present as to whether the plane was in Syrian air space (it seems to have 'strayed' there) but the shoot-down happened in international air space. As always, the problem with grabbing a cat by the tail is what to do about the claws and teeth. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 10:48 AM (#3367389) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford The crash site is said to be inside Syria's airspace, but that does not excuse the shooting down without warning. At least we know that Russia has sold them effective air defence and they know how to use it. Gung-ho hotheads advocating immediate Western military intervention take note. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 11:20 AM (#3367399) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll You mean we shouldn't intervene to stop massacres because the Syrians might shoot at our troops - now there's a thought! Jim Carroll |
|
24 Jun 12 - 11:32 AM (#3367404) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: bobad I wouldn't put a lot of money betting on their air defences vs. a Western coalition air attack. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 01:11 PM (#3367446) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll "I wouldn't put a lot of money betting on their air defences vs. a Western coalition air attack." Won't happen - no oil no humanitarian assistance Jim Carroll |
|
24 Jun 12 - 01:34 PM (#3367462) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor The USAF or the NAVY can take out the air defenses. I doubt that anyone else can. There are many many reasons why military intervention would not be the best course. There are almost as many reasons as there were in 2003 in Iraq. Any reasonable and fair person could easily see the differences between the situation in Lybia during the uprising and Syria now. If they want to. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 01:40 PM (#3367467) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: GUEST,999 Bien dit, Jack. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 01:44 PM (#3367470) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor Merci |
|
24 Jun 12 - 01:55 PM (#3367476) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Jim, you have become just another sabre rattling Colonel Blimp who believes all the world's problems can be solved by Western imperial military might, and you can't wait to send other people's kids marching to their deaths in another misadventure in Muslim lands. BTW, Syria has quite a lot of oil. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 02:14 PM (#3367484) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor Just a tad hyperbolic and hysterical there Keith? |
|
24 Jun 12 - 04:17 PM (#3367508) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Have you never seen what he says about me Jack? It is a fact that he wants NATO, or even just Britain, to go storming in without a UN mandate and throwing a direct challenge at Russia. "because the Syrians might shoot at our troops " "Our troops"? Not from the country where you live though Jim. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 04:55 PM (#3367526) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: kendall NO MORE WARS!!! We can't afford it. |
|
24 Jun 12 - 05:21 PM (#3367530) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Leadfingers The jet shot down was on a training flight according to my Daily Rag , and the wreckage was found in international waters . A training flight is unlikely to be armed or to have the Anti Radar etc gear that UK and US warplanes would be carrying in any kind of 'Conflict' situation . |
|
24 Jun 12 - 05:23 PM (#3367531) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll "Jim, you have become just another sabre rattling Colonel Blimp " No Keith - you were the first on your feet to give support to the US's invasion of another countries sovereign territory in order to carry out a political assassination, at the risk of hundreds of civilian lives. You were full of praise when Britain went in to assist the Libyan rebels, even though they had already sold Gadaffi some of the munitions that were being used against the opposition (and the British army had trained Gadaffi's son to take his place) Here you have opposed helping the Syrian people who are suffering ten times the atrocities that the Libyan rebels experienced - and your reason - it would be unwise to do so because of who they might put in Assad's place. Far from me sabre rattling, I am proposing that some practical help be given to the Syrians in order to stop stop the massacres that even you opened a thread about. I am also pointing out that, had the West's oil supplies been in any way threatened there would be no hesitation whatever in giving that help. God knows - the US has done it before now - the last time with Britain's full support and with a loss of young British lives. I don't want Britain, the US or anybody to go "storming in" - as you put it; I want practical help to be offered in order to topple this monster and bring him to trial for crimes against humanity - at the very least, refugee camps to be set up. I proposed an embargo against all trade with Syria - your response; "it would harm the Syrian people" AS IF THEY COULD BE HURT ANY MORE THAN THEY ARE ALREADY BEING HURT. SO FAR THE ONLY PRACTICAL ASSISTANCE YOU HAVE SUGGESTED IS THAT ASSAD BE SOLD ANTI-RIOT EQUIPMENT IN THE HOPE THAT HE WILL STOP USING HEAVY ARTILERY AGAINST THE CIVILIANS BEING SLAUGHTERED - UTTERLY OBSCENE BULLSHIT And your pathetic "Your country" attempt to silence my right to offer an opinion. I was born and brought up in Britain and lived there for over half a century, my parent and their parents were the same - British born and raised Your attempt to neutralise my criticism of your obscene and hypocritical stance on Syria by bringing up my choice to move to Ireland to finish the 30-odd years of recording the Irish oral tradition we did here really exposes the shallowness and hypocricy of your arguments and the small minded, flag-waving Little Brit that you really are. Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 12 - 02:46 AM (#3367637) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Turkey has said that the plane was probing Syria's radar defences so I expect it was fitted with the usual protection. Jim. To set up refugee camps inside Syria would be a large military operation. It would require a large invasion force and they would have to take on the Syrian army. Storming in. Russia has stated that it would not tolerate Western military intervention under the guise of humanitarian operations. You have also called for the same action as was taken in Libya, putting fliers at the mercy of their powerful air force and of the finest Russian air defence systems Assad's oil wealth can buy. You have also advocated "unilateral" action. Anyone who has read your posts Jim will be aware of your hatred of Britain. British service men and women are very much other people's kids to you, and people and kids who you do not care for. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 02:49 AM (#3367638) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Here you have opposed helping the Syrian people who are suffering ten times the atrocities that the Libyan rebels experienced Not true - and your reason - it would be unwise to do so because of who they might put in Assad's place. Not true. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 03:26 AM (#3367643) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Richard Bridge Funny, didn't Libya have oil wealth too? |
|
25 Jun 12 - 03:33 AM (#3367647) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Yes it did, so oil is not an issue in resorting to military intervention. Nato intervened in Bosnia to save the Muslim population, and there was no oil there at all. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 03:58 AM (#3367656) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Bonzo3legs Just send in the Italian football team to kick a few heads!! |
|
25 Jun 12 - 04:01 AM (#3367658) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Richard Bridge Well, accepting that simplistic statement about Bosnia at face value for the time being - it seems that Nato will not intervene in Syria. Compare and contrast! I am in some doubt whether the UN does indeed have a legitimate case to intervene in Syrian politics, but I do have a view about the Turkish jet which is that the balance of the evidence seems to be that it was shot down while in international airspace - which would make the Syrian action unlawful and possibly an act of war. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 04:11 AM (#3367660) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Compare and contrast. Bosnia- no oil- miltary intervention. Libya- oil- miltary intrevention. Syria- oil- no military intervention. No correlation. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 04:28 AM (#3367662) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll "To set up refugee camps inside Syria would be a large military operation. It would require a large invasion force and they would have to take on the Syrian army." As Bobad pointed out - the Syrian forces are unlikely to stand up to any force that would go in to assist, particularly those who it regards as benefactors and supporters. Once again you are opposing giving any practical assistance whatever to stopping the massacres and helping the victims - so that's it - the only support you are prepared to consider for the Syian people is your empty hand-wringing. Britain and the US have consistently been prepared to act unilaterally by sending troops into countries that threaten their political adnd economic interests. The fact that Russia and China are able to hold the UN to ransom is down to the fact that the US has persistantly abused the veto option in support of extreme terrorist regimes - it is difficult to complain of others abusing the veto when the most powerful and influential nation has done so for decades. And you are right, "oil is not an issue in resorting to military intervention" - the lack of oil is - no oil, no intervention. "will be aware of your hatred of Britain." More brain-dead flag-waving. No I do not hate Britain - I don't go in for self-hatred - I do not equate any nation by the actions (or in this case, the inaction) of their rulers. I hate the cynically murderous bastards who run it, and the sycophants who flag-wave in support of that murderous cynicism - that hartred extends to the leaders of Russia, China, the US.... and all those who give assistance (and sell weapons) to murderous thugs like Assad, and stand by and watch while those weapons are used to suppress and torture. Purely as a matter of national self-interest - the slaughtered of Homs are not the only victims of Assad's thuggery. The United Nations' credibility has been torn to shreds by not taking positive action on this affair - if it can be held to ransom by Russia (a recent convert to capitalism) and China (Britain's greatest trading partner), then it is of no use whatever as a force for international negotiation. I'll leave you to you hand-wringing "nothing can be done so let's find a wall to wail against". Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 12 - 05:02 AM (#3367668) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford the Syrian forces are unlikely to stand up to any force that would go in to assist Oh really?! Would you explain that to the dead crew of the Turkish jet who only flew by? Any source for it other than Bobad? |
|
25 Jun 12 - 05:33 AM (#3367673) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Bonzo3legs Jim Carroll really is a bundle of fun!! This is my day off, I'm going to have fun all day!! |
|
25 Jun 12 - 05:40 AM (#3367674) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack Campin It is not in Turkey's interest to start a full-scale war in a neighbouring country that would send a couple of million refugees (many of them Kurdish) over the border into a region of Turkey which has already been in a small-scale civil war for 30 years. Erdogan is not an idiot. The only policy that makes sense for him is to calm things down as far as possible. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 06:45 AM (#3367683) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll "Would you explain that to the dead crew of the Turkish jet who only flew by?" The inaction on the part of the world regarding the slaughter in Syria appears to have convinced Assad, not without reason, that he can do anything he wishes with no fear of repriasal - all the Annan initiative as they stand at present wouls achieve is a return to the status quo in Syria. Nato has seen fit to act on the situation - it has had an emergency meeting to prevent Turkey from responding to the atrocity - would that they had shown the same concern over the massacres. From this morning's Times: "NATO SEEKS TO EASE TURKISH FURY OVER DOWNED JET Roger Boyes Diplomatic Editor Nato has called an emergency session of its governing body as tensions continue to rise after Syria shot down a Turkish F4 Phantom jet fighter. The first goal of tomorrow's meeting will be to restrain Ankara's anger over what it calls "a hostile act" and to seek to prevent any independent military re¬taliation against Syria. But Nato sources say that the incident could start to mobilise support within the Alliance for a no-fly zone over the Turkish-Syrian border. Washington called the incident "brazen and unacceptable". Britain was quick to express its soli¬darity with Turkey. William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, declared: "The United Kingdom stands ready to pursue robust action at the United Nations Security Council." He was speaking as dozens more people were killed in Syrian fighting — as many as 72 over the weekend, according to activists — and after a frustrating round of talks on how to advance the ailing peace plan of Kofi Annan. The emergency meeting has been requested by Turkey under Article Four of Nato's founding Washington Treaty. This allows a member state to call for Alliance solidarity when its "territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened". It also inches the Alliance towards the sterner Article Five, which views an attack against a single member as an attack against all. That could activate the already drafted contingency plans for a no-fly zone to protect safe havens along the Turkish border. Syria claims that the low-flying jet was unidentified and that when it real¬ised what had happened it began a search for the crew. "There was no hostile act against Turkey," Jihad Makdissi, from the Syrian Foreign Ministry, said. "It was just an act of defence." Turkey says that the plane was merely testing Turkish radar defences, hence the low altitude, and was clearly marked. The remains of the jet have now been located." The violence in Syria is intensifying and while nothing is done so stop it, it will continue to do so. "This is my day off, I'm going to have fun all day!! " Not a game Bozo - you obviously have the same level of concern for the Syrian people as our paper patriot here has! Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 12 - 07:15 AM (#3367690) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford The inaction on the part of the world Not the whole world Jim. Western countries have imposed arms and trade embargoes that would have brought Assad down had not Russia refused to co operate. He could not have sustained his military but for Russian supplies. The oil embargo has drained away his currency reserves and halved the value of the Syrian pound. there have been concerted political, diplomatic, economic and financial measures taken against him, but only by Western countries. The Western nations have also pushed hard for UN action but every attempt was thwarted by Russia and China. So, will you recognise what the Western countries have done, and condemn Russia China and Iran for propping Assad up and keeping him in power and providing all his killing resources? |
|
25 Jun 12 - 07:30 AM (#3367695) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Sorry. Western and Arab nations. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 08:57 AM (#3367724) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll None of which have made the slightest difference, in fact the violence has escalated out of all proportion, even to the extent of the shooting down a plane of a neighbouring nation in the full knowledge that no serious steps will be taken against the Assad regime. The few steps that have been taken have been cancelled out by the support he has been given by Russia, China and probably Iran. If the UN does not act decisively its reputation will be left in tatters, leaving the door open to other despots - Bahrain for instance (you remember Bahrain - the feudal dictatorship Britain tried to sell weapons to within weeks of the Arab Spring disturnbances breaking out - Cameron described opposition of such sales as "racist") On top of this, the present inaction has pushed the victims of Assad into the arms of the religious nutters - as has happened in Egypt (remember Egypt - the country that the US was selling arms to to be used against protesters). http://presstv.com/detail/214439.html Whatever excuses against intervention, the Brit. one (echoed by you) of not intervening because of the possible political implications of who will replace Assad, probably being the most murderously cynical, all this is opening an extremely toxic can of worms, and rather than encouraging a move towards democracy, is pushing the Middle East from one extremist dictatorship into the arms of another. Jim Carroll |
|
25 Jun 12 - 09:17 AM (#3367729) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford excuses against intervention, the Brit. one (echoed by you) of not intervening because of the possible political implications of who will replace Assad, As I have told you many times, that is not true. It is a lie Jim. Britain has made no excuse for not intervening, and I have not echoed any. It has made a large number of interventions. The British position is that Assad must go. Assad is still in power thanks only to the support of Russia, China and Iran. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 10:40 AM (#3367752) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: GUEST,999 You guys know how to message each other? Curious minds want to know. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 10:46 AM (#3367755) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: bobad At first glance I read that as "massage" rather than "message" - that might be good too. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 01:15 PM (#3367808) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: GUEST,999 Fifty percent of the thread is the SSDD between these two and the fucking thread is about neither of them, it has just begun to seem so. It's a pain in the arse to skip posts because when these guys aren't fighting with each other they have valuable information to contribute, both being relatively informed and smart. However, now that I've pissed off both I suppose I'll be at the top of someone's shit list now, like I've never been THERE before. Gentlemen, take cold showers. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 01:41 PM (#3367818) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor I was thinking "get a room." |
|
25 Jun 12 - 02:27 PM (#3367828) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jim Carroll Quite agree 999 - feel free to join in. To no-one in particular. Not a question of vote or veto, therefor a duty Jim Carroll "The responsibility to protect (R2P or RtoP) is a United Nations initiative established in 2005. It consists of an emerging norm, or set of principles, based on the idea that sovereignty is not a right, but a responsibility.[1] R2P focuses on preventing and halting four crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing, which it places under the generic umbrella term of, Mass Atrocity Crimes.[2] The Responsibility to Protect has three "pillars". 1.A state has a responsibility to protect its population from mass atrocities; 2.The international community has a responsibility to assist the state to fulfill its primary responsibility; 3.If the state fails to protect its citizens from mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.[3][4] In the international community R2P is a norm, not a law.[5] R2P provides a framework for using tools that already exist, i.e. mediation, early warning mechanisms, economic sanctioning, and chapter VII powers, to prevent mass atrocities. Civil society organizations, States, regional organizations, and international institutions all have a role to play in the R2P process. The authority to employ the last resort and intervene militarily rests solely with United Nations Security Council and the General Assembly" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_to_protect |
|
25 Jun 12 - 02:49 PM (#3367839) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Little Hawk Now and then something like this happens. That is, someone shoots down an airplane that they think is trespassing or is some kind of a threat to them. The US Navy, for instance, shot down an Iranian airliner on one occasion...presumably mistook it for something dangerous? Such an incident only results in a war between nations when people on one or both sides completely lose their heads.... or... When someone wanted a handy excuse for launching that war in the first place, in which case the incident serves the purpose. I doubt that the Turks want such a war. I doubt that the Syrians want such a war. Why would they? Others in the international community may, however, want such a war for their own reasons, if they think it serves their strategic purposes. The smart thing for both the Turks and the Syrians to do in this case is not completely lose their heads over the incident. You cannot cure the initial problem of losing one airplane and 2 men by starting a war that destroys a vastly greater number of other machines and human beings just to show everyone how VERY upset you are about losing that first airplane. But if you're a fool or a lunatic...well, then you might try to cure the problem in that fashion. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 03:02 PM (#3367846) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor It's a little more complicated when mutual defense treaties are involved. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 03:28 PM (#3367858) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Little Hawk Yes, it's complicated. |
|
25 Jun 12 - 05:29 PM (#3367928) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor As I suspected. Turkey calling on NATO |
|
25 Jun 12 - 05:58 PM (#3367945) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford Not a question of vote or veto, therefor a duty We might think so. Russia and China do not. One veto stops any action. We might wish it otherwise, but that is the UN. Start a UN thread but be clear, it is those who use the veto you should rage at, not those who seek action but are frustrated. 999, I would rather discuss Syria with anyone rather than JC. Neither he nor I prevent anyone else contributing. There is no limit on posts. Please, what are your thoughts about the embargoes and the vetoes and ten thousand murders? |
|
25 Jun 12 - 06:57 PM (#3367973) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: gnu It was an F4... innocous and easily IDd by the Syrians... wtf was one F4 gonna do? It sounds orchastrated to me. Then again, I am no expert in military esclation or why there is any need for same. Oil? or the flow thereof? Yeah, I know it's been discussed. Maybe there is more to this than meets they eye initially? |
|
26 Jun 12 - 03:00 AM (#3368080) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Keith A of Hertford I am no expert either gnu, but from Syria's POV it is not so strange. Less than 5 years ago Syria's nuclear facility was completely destroyed by an air strike, humiliatingly without the loss of a single aircraft. (and are we not all grateful to Israel now?) That was a powerful incentive for them to acquire a world class air defence system. Turkey has been outspoken against Assad and has been harbouring insurgents. Syria wants the world to know that in a Libyan style air intervention it will not be such a push over. If there was such an intervention, it would come from Turkey and Turkish F4s would be a part of it. It was flying fast and low and penetrated Syria's air space. It is disputed where it was when attacked, but it crashed in Syrian air space. |
|
26 Jun 12 - 09:59 AM (#3368170) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: pdq Vladimir Putin has returned Russia to the aggressive policies of the old Soviet Union. Since he took over in 1998, the Russian GDP has gone up about six fold, much of the money comes from arms sale to countries like Iran and Syria which have plenty of oil money to pay for the most sophisticated weapons. |
|
26 Jun 12 - 01:47 PM (#3368270) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: Jack the Sailor "much of the money comes from arms sale to countries like Iran and Syria which have plenty of oil money to pay for the most sophisticated weapons. " I don't think so. They are the biggest oil and gas producer in the world. Everything else pales in comparison. |
|
26 Jun 12 - 07:44 PM (#3368425) Subject: RE: BS: Turkish jet shot down From: gnu My post stuck to the satellite! 4th post, at least! Short version... one F4... strayed into Syrian airspace momentarily... not an attack but perhaps a test. Why did the Syrians shoot it down? Was there any attempt to contact? Who knows? Seems orchastrated but for what reason(s)?... on both sides. |