World Politics

[Amsterhammer]

One pilot reportedly dead, condition of the other unknown.

Russians insist plane was in Syrian air space, Turks claim a 30 mile incursion, and that they gave 10 warnings within five minutes.

Russians claim plane brought down by ground fire, Turks say their F-16 shot it down. Presumably the Turks should have film of the 'kill', radar coordinates, tapes of the warnings, all that kind of stuff.

 

[python]

all claims and counterclaims have already been posted above. Both sides, not just the turks, are likely to own certain data to support their claims. whether it will be released and who is right i am not holding my breath to find out. whatever radar data the turks may have could be more than offset by a real track of a gps or a russian version of it -glonass.

another version circulated - not the likeliest - it was a rebel manpad 'sitting' on a mountaintop and shooting afghan-style modernized stinger at the limit of its range (said to be almost 5km).

@busted
the russians have a whole system of communication and ground control in their airbase in northern syria.. open sources.

 

[Bustedknuckle]

Re:

all claims and counterclaims have already been posted above. Both sides, not just the turks, are likely to own certain data to support their claims. whether it will be released and who is right i am not holding my breath to find out. whatever radar data the turks may have could be more than offset by a real track of a gps or a russian version of it -glonass.

another version circulated - not the likeliest - it was a rebel manpad 'sitting' on a mountaintop and shooting afghan-style modernized stinger at the limit of its range (said to be almost 5km).

@busted
the russians have a whole system of communication and ground control in their airbase in northern syria.. open sources.

Thanks...

 

[python]

i am listening live to a press conference held by the jordanian king and putin...putin said some things that contradicted his ministry of defence and seems very ominous. i am passing the shorthand of the english interpreter.. she speaks with a russian accent - most likely NOT yet appearing anywhere but the cn

- it is a strike in our back. it is a turkish provocation.
-it was an air-to-air turkish missile (seems like vlad is better informed than his military)
-the plane was 1km inside the syrian border
-turkey is a transition point for isil smuggled oil, fighters etc

vlad did not sound any counter threats but said it is very serious and goes beyond just the anti-isil fight. he sounded very dim towards turkey.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Somebody needs to apply some serious screws to Erdogan. Sounds like a unilateral Turkish provocation.

 

[hrotha]

Well, it remains to be seen whether or not Russia violated Turkish airspace. It might well prove to be a bilateral provocation yet.

Putin's words are quite interesting, though:

Do they want to make Nato serve ISIS? I understand that every state has its own regional interests and we’ve always respected that, but we will never allow the kind of crime that happened to today to take place. And of course we hope that the international community will find the strength to come together and fight against the common evil.

Is he trying to drive a wedge between Turkey and the West? To be honest, I can't say that'd be a bad thing for, say, the EU. Putin is of course not impartial, but he does have the liberty to call out Turkey for its shenanigans (preexisting this incident) in a way its allies not always can (or are willing to).

 

[Merckx index]

This really looks like a stupid move by Turkey. According to their own map, the Russian jet went over a small protrusion of Turkish. territory, was clearly on the way out back to Syria, and was almost there (it seems clear the plane crashed in Syria). The Turkish pilots said they told the Russians to leave Turkish airspace, the Russians allegedly didn't respond, but since they were clearly on the way out, why not let them go?

It seems one of the Russian pilots was killed by gunfire (not captured alive) while parachuting down, the other pilot's whereabouts seems to be unknown. As Python noted, though, there is still some ambiguity about who and what brought the jet down, as the Russians last I heard were claiming it was someone on the ground. Frankly, when I first heard that, I almost wondered if they were giving Turkey a way out, by letting it appear it wasn't American's NATO ally that shot the jet down, but a rebel force in Syria.

Also of relevance here is Putin saying his meeting with Hollande will be the beginning of a coalition to fight ISIL. There is of course already a coalition. I can't believe how difficult it's proving for countries that ought to be 100% together against ISIL to work together. At a recent speech, Obama said getting rid of Assad wasn't just a moral issue, but a practical one, that given the opposition to him in Syria, there's no way he could remain in power even if the U.S. didn't oppose him. But that seems to ignore that he also has a lot of support in Syria, so it's not obvious that anyone else at this point could take over, either.

 

[python]

here's what i find worthy a good look in the aftermath of the turkish plane shooting a russian down.

those who followed this thread since the beginning of the russian intervention in syria, may recall several posts, including the 3-4 of my posts, re. several russian violations of the turkish airspace and the turks claimed downing of a russian drone. what made those events curious was that the violations happened in quick succession and the shear number of them, including 2 for which russia officially apologized.

my posted opinion at that time was that there were too many violations to be a plain mistake. i speculated that russia was playing a hard ball with turkey to incite/intimidate it into a military DE-conflicting agreement similar to the one they concluded with the israelis, and later with the americans and jordanians. it is of course a speculation, but besides being based on the turkey's inherently weak hand, it jived with vlad's spirit of risky and baltsy actions syria.

it is a fact - turkey had refused the de-conflicting agreement b/c it was pursuing a no fly zone over the 900 km border with syria thus extending protection to the turkey-supported rebels against both the kurds and the assad.

seems like erdogan has decided to play the hard ball and made his move. in light of turkey being de facto complicit in isil power base, the erdogan game imo criminal. of course, my analysis is based on a lot of speculation.

 

[jens_attacks]

I always considered erdogan a bigger risk to peace than putin. The guy and his party are lunatics

I hope nato will show them the door.

 

[jens_attacks]

thanks usa for supporting those good rebels. they are awesome just like the other ones you supported


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5g6008U&feature=youtu.be

 

[Irondan]

Re:

thanks usa for supporting those good rebels. they are awesome just like the other ones you supported


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5g6008U&feature=youtu.be

I'm assuming this is footage of the Russian pilots parachuting to the ground after they were hit? It sounds like they were trying to shoot them before they hit the ground?

Honestly, I don't have any idea how you link the USA to this video and the people shooting at the russian pilots.

 

[jens_attacks]

Re: Re:

thanks usa for supporting those good rebels. they are awesome just like the other ones you supported


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5g6008U&feature=youtu.be

I'm assuming this is footage of the Russian pilots parachuting to the ground after they were hit? It sounds like they were trying to shoot them before they hit the ground?

Honestly, I don't have any idea how you link the USA to this video and the people shooting at the russian pilots.

yes those guys fight against assad and are armed by the americans. they are not as radicals as ISIS, more like al-qaeda lol

putin fights them and rightfully so. bashar is the lesser evil.

erdogan just went full ***. ballsy but crazy move.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

thanks usa for supporting those good rebels. they are awesome just like the other ones you supported


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5g6008U&feature=youtu.be

I'm assuming this is footage of the Russian pilots parachuting to the ground after they were hit? It sounds like they were trying to shoot them before they hit the ground?

Honestly, I don't have any idea how you link the USA to this video and the people shooting at the russian pilots.

I think these are the Rebels Northern Syrian and Kurds???? which the UK and the USA support. The UK supported with non lethal aid and us Merikan's gave them things like TOW missiles (which these same rebels appear to have blown up a disabled Russian Helicopter today) and other weapons.

 

[Echoes]

So Turkey shot down a Russian Sukhoi, it must obviously be a unilateral decision by a recalcitrant NATO ally. Surely, we deny all responsability in this tragedy. We are Russia's best friends and have always been.

Just hope that Putin stops dealing with Turkey re: energy.

I can't stand this secularist state. They will never recognise the Armenian Genocide because the Young Turks paved the way of Attaturk's fanatically secularist regime.

By the way, for those who don't find it puzzling: Israel not too worried by Islamic State, defense chief says (Times of Israel)

"There are a few IS supporters in Gaza, which Hamas is battling there; that’s an interesting phenomenon.” (Very interesting indeed)

"Ya’alon said Iran’s presence in the region was more worrying than the Islamic State group." (which side are they on?)

It's also well established that Israel have hospitalised some 500 terrorists from Al Nusra and sent them back to Syria.

this
the australian guy in the vatican, archbishop pell, utterly unsympathetic individual. protects all the criminal pedophiles. he himself is protected, he should be prosecuted for his information and being an accessory

What does that have to do with my post or with the guy whom you quoted. He was perfidly referring to Catholic priests while you are referring to a Counciliarist/Vatican II archbishop. Rome is apostate now. No wonder they have pedophilia problems. Besides, the poster in question as usual uses the pilpul technique which consists of isolating one element in my reasoning in order to prove I am wrong and even if I were wrong in a couple of elements here or there that might not change anything about the validity of the whole. In order to prove that a debater is wrong one should take his whole point.

 

[python]

something does not jive in the turkey's version of the incident...they said they issued 10 warning over 5 minutes
while their own map seems to prove the russian could not have been in the airspace for longer that several seconds.

here's a turkey-released official radar tracks of both their f-16 and the downed russian along the border. i got it at a respected and normally impartial site the aviationsit.

the blue are turkey's f-16 on patrol within their airspace. the red is a russian within syrya and crossing the corner of turkey (a glowing border line) that's no more than 2 miles wide. assuming a decent air speed of 600 mph, it would take only 12 second to fly. these comments are not mine but by the readers of the blog who are more knowledgeable..

10 warnings in 5 minutes

 

[hrotha]

They said they warned them as they approached their border, not just when they crossed over.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

They said they warned them as they approached their border, not just when they crossed over.

No matter really if they warned on the approach to the border. The time line as Python shows does not jive.

The fact that they crossed was not a provocation in my opinion. They dropped no ordinance in Turkey. Turkey is playing games with this.

Those terrorist "rebels" shooting up the Pilot and WSO while they were floating back to earth. That is a serious problem for these "rebels" because the back lash after that is going to be great in my opinion.

 

[hrotha]

Of course it matters when they warned them in this particular argument. Python's timeline doesn't jive because he assumed the warnings only came when the Turkish airspace was breached; that would be impossible, and therefore Turkey would have to be lying about the warnings. If they were on a direct course to Turkey for a while, as the radar map suggests, that would mean the Turkish story about the warnings could be true or at least consistent with the facts. I don't know whether Russia denies their pilots were warned.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

They said they warned them as they approached their border, not just when they crossed over.

No matter really if they warned on the approach to the border. The time line as Python shows does not jive.

The fact that they crossed was not a provocation in my opinion. They dropped no ordinance in Turkey. Turkey is playing games with this.

Those terrorist "rebels" shooting up the Pilot and WSO while they were floating back to earth. That is a serious problem for these "rebels" because the back lash after that is going to be great in my opinion.

I think crossing into a sovereign nation's airspace is practically the definition of "provocation ". Not dropping bombs makes it not an attack, but certainly it's a provocation.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

Of course it matters when they warned them in this particular argument. Python's timeline doesn't jive because he assumed the warnings only came when the Turkish airspace was breached; that would be impossible, and therefore Turkey would have to be lying about the warnings. If they were on a direct course to Turkey for a while, as the radar map suggests, that would mean the Turkish story about the warnings could be true or at least consistent with the facts. I don't know whether Russia denies their pilots were warned.

Well I guess we will have to wait for the "evidence".

I see your point - maybe I don't necessarily agree but if Turkey and Russia had been playing these airspace tactics then it could have played into this incident.

I think the timeline pointed out by Python was a theory or analysis by another site of aviators. Not his own.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

They said they warned them as they approached their border, not just when they crossed over.

No matter really if they warned on the approach to the border. The time line as Python shows does not jive.

The fact that they crossed was not a provocation in my opinion. They dropped no ordinance in Turkey. Turkey is playing games with this.

Those terrorist "rebels" shooting up the Pilot and WSO while they were floating back to earth. That is a serious problem for these "rebels" because the back lash after that is going to be great in my opinion.

I think crossing into a sovereign nation's airspace is practically the definition of "provocation ". Not dropping bombs makes it not an attack, but certainly it's a provocation.

True
I understand that. But I thought maybe Turkey should understand that the way the border is ---makes it a easy situation for anyone to fly across that finger of the border.

 

[python]

Re: Re:

Of course it matters when they warned them in this particular argument. Python's timeline doesn't jive because he assumed the warnings only came when the Turkish airspace was breached; that would be impossible, and therefore Turkey would have to be lying about the warnings. If they were on a direct course to Turkey for a while, as the radar map suggests, that would mean the Turkish story about the warnings could be true or at least consistent with the facts. I don't know whether Russia denies their pilots were warned.

Well I guess we will have to wait for the "evidence".

I see your point - maybe I don't necessarily agree but if Turkey and Russia had been playing these airspace tactics then it could have played into this incident.

I think the timeline pointed out by Python was a theory or analysis by another site of aviators. Not his own.

i actually think that your read, glenn, was correct. the anlysis of another site and the objective data as posted by a well known impartial blog (the aviationist) was posted for a discussion. i clearly referred to the opinions of people who are more knowledgeable in the matter. let's keep in mind that it was turkey's evidence, that russia denies stating their plane was 1 km inside syria. i am not sure if they released their data. if they ever do, you can be sure the aviationist will publish it.

regarding the turko-russian games. you right here too...as i posted earlier, and this is significant, yesterday turkey officially protested the russians bombing a faction supported by the turks (incidentally they are syrian turks, the turkmen) right at the border...it is a risk taking all around and of course a game of chicken. clearly turkey is red hot about 'their' rebels are being pulverized and the russians while aware the turks dont like it, continue attacking right on the border...they say they bombed there b/c that's where the smuggling of oil and fighters is taking place.

still i think it was an unwise, stupid move by erdogan and i was glad to see many posters seeing that...what's next ? i think russia will now carpet bomb the syrian turks and if turkey hoping to cover their arses by a nato leaf will try to oppose, there will be a shut down f-16 very soon. turkey gave a perfect cause for russia to try to split nato...no sane nato member, knowing that turkey is a de facto isil sponsor, will stand for further escalation...

 

[frenchfry]

this
the australian guy in the vatican, archbishop pell, utterly unsympathetic individual. protects all the criminal pedophiles. he himself is protected, he should be prosecuted for his information and being an accessory

What does that have to do with my post or with the guy whom you quoted. He was perfidly referring to Catholic priests while you are referring to a Counciliarist/Vatican II archbishop. Rome is apostate now. No wonder they have pedophilia problems. Besides, the poster in question as usual uses the pilpul technique which consists of isolating one element in my reasoning in order to prove I am wrong and even if I were wrong in a couple of elements here or there that might not change anything about the validity of the whole. In order to prove that a debater is wrong one should take his whole point.

For those that don't know what the pilpul technique is (like I didn't) I looked it up. Looks like a pretty good technique to me. Thanks for the compliment Echoes!

The essential characteristic of pilpul is that it leads to a clear comprehension of the subject under discussion by penetrating into its essence and by adopting clear distinctions and a strict differentiation of the concepts. By this method a sentence or maxim is carefully studied, the various concepts which it includes are exactly determined, and all the possible consequences to be deduced from it are carefully investigated. The sentence is then examined in its relation to some other sentence harmonizing with it, the investigation being directed toward determining whether the agreement appearing on a superficial contemplation of them continues to be manifest when all the possible consequences and deductions are drawn from each one of them; for if contradictory deductions follow from the two apparently agreeing sentences, then this apparent agreement is not an agreement in fact. Again, if two sentences apparently contradict each other, the pilpulistic method seeks to ascertain whether this seeming contradiction may not be removed by a more careful definition and a more exact limitation of the concepts connected with the respective sentences. If two contiguous sentences or maxims apparently imply the same thing, this method endeavors to decide whether the second sentence is really a repetition of the first and could have been omitted, or whether by a more subtle differentiation of the concepts a different shade of meaning may be discovered between them. Similarly if a regulation is mentioned in connection with two parallel cases, this methoddetermines whether it might not have been concluded from the similarity of the cases itself that the regulation applying to the one applied to the other also, and why it was necessary to repeat explicitly the same regulation.

The pilpulistic method, however, is not satisfied with merely attaining the object of its investigation. After having reached the desired result in one way, it inquires whether the same result might not have been attained in another, so that, if the first method of procedure should be eventually refuted, another method and another proof for the result attained may be forthcoming.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

They said they warned them as they approached their border, not just when they crossed over.

No matter really if they warned on the approach to the border. The time line as Python shows does not jive.

The fact that they crossed was not a provocation in my opinion. They dropped no ordinance in Turkey. Turkey is playing games with this.

Those terrorist "rebels" shooting up the Pilot and WSO while they were floating back to earth. That is a serious problem for these "rebels" because the back lash after that is going to be great in my opinion.

I think crossing into a sovereign nation's airspace is practically the definition of "provocation ". Not dropping bombs makes it not an attack, but certainly it's a provocation.

True
I understand that. But I thought maybe Turkey should understand that the way the border is ---makes it a easy situation for anyone to fly across that finger of the border.

That's true, but you have to ask why the Russian plane, knowing where it was, was circling and moving around so close to the border and over it. It seems impossible to believe that there were not several warnings as this plane approached Turkish airspace. That plane was not there by accident, it was there engaging in action it knew to be risky and provocative. The only question is whether it was simply a provocation or whether there were legitimate military reasons for it to be there which made the risks worth it.

You can't really complain and call it back-stabbing when you're flying planes near and into sovereign air space. That reaction by Putin suggests that the answer to "why" had more to do with provocation than an accident borne of a calculated risk with tangible military benefits.

Any way you slice it, this was inevitable. You get that many planes and armed forces that close to one another with conflicting goals and a confused battleground, and you are going to get incidents like this.

 

[python]

as i just posted, the escalation is on...several sites are reporting a stern russian defense ministry's statement.

its hilites:

-su-24 was inside syria and was hit by a turkey f-16 that violated syrian airspace. they cite what they called an objective control both their own and the syrian.
- russian operations in the area will continue and will ALL be from now on escorted by the fighters. any threats will be met accordingly.
-their cruiser in the area is shipping to a latakia province vicinity and will shoot-to-kill any air threat to russian operations. the cruiser is sporting a s-300 system claimed to match or exceed the patriots.
- they confirmed a loss of a search helo shot by rebel weapons while on the ground (the rebel video turns out correct)
- they confirmed one of the pilots was killed in the air (again, confirming the rebel video posted above)
-they confirmed losing another soldier from a search party.

2 earlier predicted developments are now close to panning out...1. russia is getting sucked in ala afghanistan, but not there yet, which offers nothing positive for putin. 2. erdogan's duplicity ( a nato member being a defacto accomplice of isil) may now get called in. if not by the fellow 'members' than by vlad.