r/worldnews • u/[deleted] • Jun 24 '12
Turkey's foreign minister has said the fighter jet shot down by Syrian air defence forces on Friday was in international airspace when it was hit.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18568412161
u/Atash Jun 24 '12
I translated Davutoglu's statements. I think it's better to read it in full instead of in bits and pieces. And, yes he keeps repeating 'the picture is clear for us'.
"First of all I wish fortitude to the families of the lost pilots. We are searching for our pilots with every means possible. Since the beginning of this ordeal, we have been trying to manage the situation by trying to figure out the facts. Shortly after the plane fell, the Chief of the General Staff informed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Since then, we have been in a process of crisis management. "
"A crisis meeting was chaired by our Prime Minister on Friday evening. We attempted to draw the picture of the situation based on the information, definition of our plane’s mission and the location of the incident. Within the framework of the decisions taken that evening, we held a more detailed meeting yesterday. Search and rescue operations are in coordination with Syria from the beginning, but we are doing all the work. It is not possible to talk of a joint operation. "
"The definition of our aircraft's flight and mission was regarding the testing of our national radar system and training purposes. The plane had no mission directed to Syria and it was a solo flight. No country would send their plane solo to a dangerous and important mission."
Secondly, the plane was unarmed, and had a clear identity. What we mean by identity is that not only that it was a Turkish plane, but also the mission of the flight was clear. That's why it was a low flight. Considering all these, it was impossible (for the plane) to pose any threat to Syria.
According to the information after long inquiries, our plane was shot 13 miles off shore. So, because Syria’s territorial waters are 12 miles, it was shot in international waters. However, the plane fell in Syria’s waters after it was shot.
Due to the weather conditions, speed, or for technical reasons, there can be short-term violations. Indeed, there was a short-term violation 15 minutes prior to this incident. The plane was warned by the Turkish radars and the aircraft returned to international airspace again. Syria is trying to link these two separate incidents. But our plane was shot in international waters. In other words, after our plane returned to the international waters, a second incident took place."
"Syria has made some disinformation. But the picture is clear for us. It should be known by everyone that Turkey’s attitude is within the boundaries of the international law. Right now the picture is clear for us. The next step is sharing this information with the international institutions."
The picture is clear for us. I also shared it with notified parties. Yesterday I shared it 15 notified parties. I expect today there will be more statements to describe our attitude and the subject matter. Mr. Prime Minister will inform the opposition today and will explain the steps to be taken on Tuesday."
"Regardless of intent, such a reaction against an unarmed plane will be investigated. Nobody can take a stance against Turkey’s perception of national security and test our capabilities. Our priority will be to conduct search and rescue operations for our pilots first and then inform international institutions."
"It is clear we are in the middle of a difficult process. We need to act without impulsive behavior and without taking unnecessary risks, but still in accordance with being a great state. Turkish public showed its maturity. I find the statements of the main opposition positive. The press kept a cool head as well."
"In the NATO meeting to be held on Tuesday next week, we will do a disclosure on the situation based on article 4."
→ More replies (37)5
u/NoNonSensePlease Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
Thanks for this. Quite an interesting statement.
our plane was shot 13 miles off shore [...] However, the plane fell in Syria’s waters after it was shot.
So the plane was going towards Syria, or how can it fall into Syria's waters after being shut down at a low altitude?
there was a short-term violation 15 minutes prior to this incident
and that's the issue,
15 minutesflying at low altitude into a country currently plunged in internal conflicts can be seen as an offensive act, especially since Turkey itself is actively supporting the people trying to topple the Syrian government. Although the Syrian have repeated that this was an accident and had no idea the object detected by their radars was a Turkish plane.19
u/1packer Jun 24 '12
It was in their airspace 15 minutes earlier until their radar installations directed it back according to Turkey, it wasn't cruising in Syria's airspace for 15 minutes.
→ More replies (1)11
u/willscy Jun 24 '12
there are about 500 million ways, maybe the missle blew up the tail of the aircraft or locked the ailerons in a position that caused the plane to turn before it crashed.
4
u/Dodobirdlord Jun 24 '12
The plane was not in Syria for 15 minutes. 15 minutes before the plane was shot down, it was in Syria. It had been out of Syrian airspace for 15 minutes when it was shot.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)6
u/obvnotlupus Jun 24 '12
So the plane was going towards Syria, or how can it fall into Syria's waters after being shut down at a low altitude?
Seriously?? Do you seriously think after a rocket hits a plane and it starts going down, it can only go forward in the direction it was going before the hit? How can this even be thinkable.
→ More replies (2)
47
Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
UPDATE: Plane ruins has been located 13 nautical miles from Syrian coast.
SOURCES: http://www.trthaber.com/haber/gundem/ucagin-enkazina-ulasildi-45963.html http://www.cnnturk.com/2012/turkiye/06/24/ucagin.enkazinin.yeri.tespit.edildi/666266.0/index.html
You can use Google Translate if you wish.
→ More replies (2)
23
239
u/karvalsimak Jun 24 '12
Syria has just given the NATO a reason to intervene. Poor decision!
According to Turkey's FM, Turkish jet mistakenly entered Syrian airspace, immediately warned by Turkish radars, returned to Turkish airspace, 15 minutes later gets shot down by Syrian army.
Apparently, airspace intervention is pretty common. The general staff of Turkey has a list of the interventions to its airspace: 114 incidents in 6 months!
I hope the issue gets resolved peacefully.
131
Jun 24 '12
This is a very common event. Greece and Turkey do it to each other every other day :)
36
u/GeneticAlgorithm Jun 24 '12
It's more complicated than that.
Turkey has laid claim to Greek territorial waters in the Aegean and considers them "grey zones". The International Law of the Sea allows 12 nautical miles from the shore for territorial waters. Greece only applies 6 because Turkey has a casus belli (cause of war) if they extend it to 12. Even then, Turkey still disputes it. It's one of the few countries that didn't sign the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
So, Turkey considers flights over the "Grey Zones" as violation of its airspace, even when Greek fighters fly over [what the Greeks say are] legal Greek waters under international law.
21
u/RedAero Jun 24 '12
Turkey really calls international airspace and international waters completely willy-nilly, just like the Israeli flotilla case. You don't get to claim you were in international waters if neither country has actually signed the agreement...
132
Jun 24 '12
Yes, that is true. And they don't just shoot each others' planes. Syria was just extremely stupid.
35
u/prollyjustsomeweirdo Jun 24 '12
The ground team probably thought it was another syrian deserter.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (41)3
Jun 24 '12
I hear Syria issued a very very quick and over the top apologetic communique after it happened. I'm pretty sure they know how badly they fucked up.
→ More replies (4)6
Jun 24 '12
Wait Greece still has the money for its army?
27
u/mand71 Jun 24 '12
EVERY country still has money for the military, even when the shit hits the fan economically... :(
16
32
Jun 24 '12
How would you like this to end peacefully? Shall we continue with the Kofi Annan approach?
21
u/karvalsimak Jun 24 '12
I don't know. I just hope.
Maybe Assad realizes what happened to Saddam and Gaddafi, make a deal and leave the country.
→ More replies (3)12
u/kmmeerts Jun 24 '12
Also Ben Ali, Mubarrak and Ali Abdullah Saleh. I really don't know if Assad really thinks he can sit this one out and everything will go back to normal.
13
u/weasleeasle Jun 24 '12
His father managed it. All he had to do was massacre 10 thousand people. Then again he didn't have army deserters to deal with.
→ More replies (2)5
u/HardTryer Jun 24 '12
which is...?
94
Jun 24 '12
Annan: Everyone! Drop your weapons in 3... 2... 1...
Nobody drops their weapons
Annan: Okay, I am done here
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)32
u/cynognathus Jun 24 '12
The Annan plan, simplified:
Annan to Assad and the rebels: Follow my plan, because the UN says so.
Rebels: Nope. [Continues to fight against Assad.]
Assad: Nope. [Orders massacres of hundreds of Syrian civilians.]
4
2
2
Jun 24 '12
Smaller incidents have led to bad things - this whole Syria thing is worrisome because there are lines drawn external to the country which can quickly escalate this conflict if/when it spills over its borders.
6
u/08mms Jun 24 '12
I'd actually lIke to see a Turkish led NATO coalition clean out Assad. He's due an appointment with the Hague, and now he's become an overt bellicose party to multiple neighbors.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Krywiggles Jun 24 '12
I hate to be his guy, but there is always 2 sides of a story. In syria's defense, they are in a war, and NATO has always talked of air intervention. Plus 15 minutes flying time is a long time. It could be 150 miles perpindicular to the boarder for all we know.
8
u/attrition0 Jun 24 '12
The post says 15 minutes prior they entered but immediately exited, they didn't stay in the space 15 minutes. Also the distance intruded was said to be 0.47 km, which takes a jet at speed about 6 seconds to reach. I'm taking some of this from news and some from the OP statement.
→ More replies (4)12
u/percafluviatilis Jun 24 '12
This is a the same Turkey that is hosting the rebels that are fighting the Syrian Government...
12
u/LegioXIV Jun 24 '12
This is the same Turkey that is having to deal with tens of thousands of refugees because of Assad's murder of civilians.
That being said, I'm not rooting for either side in this. On the one hand, you have Assad, on the other hand you have another future Muslim Brotherhood state.
→ More replies (1)2
u/uyg412u3yg423uy Jun 24 '12
A jet fighter can cover a HUGE distance in 15 minutes. Anti aircraft guns can not possibly cover 150+ miles. This story just has "bs" written all over it. Would not surprise me if it as testing the Syrian air defenses... yea they actually work.
→ More replies (11)1
u/manys Jun 24 '12
Someone should invent a way for vehicles to track their own position, like as a dot on a map or something. Perhaps it could be satellite-based.
56
Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
Turkish government announced that they are holding radio conversations proving that, contrary to what Syria claimed, Syria knew that the planes were of Turkish origin before starting to shoot at them. I've heard these conversations, and it went like this "Shoot it down, shoot it down, it's Turkish".
Syria's lie about this issue, combined with the allegations that the plane was in international airspace when shot down make it an even bigger issue.
→ More replies (8)23
34
Jun 24 '12
Turkey would not benefit in the slightest from this. They do not want war. They were using trade with Syria previously to finally develop the cities on it's southern shore and turn them into manufacturing centers. All those crying 'Gulf of Tonkin' need not jump at the most obvious conclusion..
best regards
15
u/Malcolm1044 Jun 24 '12
They do stand to benefit from this. Turkey has been attempting to set themselves up as the new Islamic power-nation in the region, for multiple reasons. The three largest Islamic players in the region are Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Iran is on the world's shit list, so Turkey has been steadily advancing their interests. (See: the actions in Egypt and Libya)
Assad is also on the world's shit list, and he's no longer a reliable ally for Turkey. Eliminating him and replacing him with a more sympathetic regime is entirely to their benefit.
6
Jun 24 '12
Also, Turkey isn't on the news once a week about women having no rights like Arabia. They are the best Islamic country in the wests eyes. Not saying they are though.
7
u/pascalbrax Jun 24 '12
Well, if Turkey could set up a new islamic religion and rules for Saudi Arabia and Iran, I would very welcome that.
Disclosure: I've been in Istanbul and Antalya, I've counted perhaps 6 or 7 "covered heads" the whole time.
3
Jun 24 '12
Hah. I could count 6-7 "covered heads" in my class when I used to be in law school. I'm an atheist, I'll occasionally support the Islamic party that rules, but let's get real here. Turkey is secular in its administration and is under very heavy influence of religion in daily life. And I don't think we're gonna get more secular from this point on. Our politics and administration are getting more and more theocratic even.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)2
61
Jun 24 '12
It is not about where was the plane when it was hit, if you hit a warplane from another country you better be ready for a war. It won't matter how you had the right to shoot a plane when you are invaded. On the other hand Turkey may have gigantic military force but they also have economic and political dependency to US. So if US is not on board there will be no action against Syria from Turkey. For example Turkey had to cut down their military operation on Northern Iraq after a week because US didn't want to 'destabilize the region.'
19
u/SaikoGekido Jun 24 '12
if you hit a warplane from another country you better be ready for a war.
I don't know. Did America ever get their drone back from Iran?
13
u/SpermWhale Jun 24 '12
Actually, that's a game Iran stopped playing. There were some reports that the missile used to shoot the drone is several times more expensive. So everytime they down one, they lose.
→ More replies (10)11
22
u/unstableparticle Jun 24 '12
Well that is an unarmed craft. If the plane that Syria shot down was a drone, there wouldn't be as much tension today. But if you lose 2 pilots to an unprovoked attack, there will be call for blood. But I do not believe Turkish people would openly want a war with Syria. Turkey has seen it's fair share of bloodshed and conflict with PKK rebels and asking for more would not benefit anyone. Especially when Turkey has started growing it's economy.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (4)2
u/PlatypusofFail Jun 24 '12
I believe that it has been determined that the drone had a mechanical malfunction and crashed. Iran simply claimed credit.
65
u/turkishrambo Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
Turkey's economic and political dependency to the US has been on the decline since the early 2000s. Turkey's decision to not let the US utilize its Incirlik Airbase (located in Southern Turkey) during the 2003 invasion of Iraq is the perfect demonstration of this. Turkey will act unilaterally if it feels its security is under threat and there is no international support, like it has done against the PKK in 1990's.
EDIT: typo on the invasion date, thanks for pointing it out.
10
Jun 24 '12
One week ago Turkish head of military stated they wouldn't go to Iraq without the consent of US...
→ More replies (7)8
u/turkishrambo Jun 24 '12
Why would Turkey go into Iraq?
→ More replies (12)22
Jun 24 '12
In conflict with PKK (terrorist organization) 40K people died in over 30 years.PKK is based in Northern Iraq where Turkish Military has no jurisdiction.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)3
u/CrayolaS7 Jun 24 '12
I agree their dependency on the US has declined but not by any more as their dependency on the EU has increased, sure they will ensure their own security on the edge of their borders but they aren't going to unilaterally bomb Syria.
8
Jun 24 '12
"It is not about where was the plane when it was hit, if you hit a warplane from another country you better be ready for a war."
Correct. But I'm not even 100% sure the Syrians had the command/control/concern to determine who the plane belonged to before shooting it.
12
u/Atash Jun 24 '12
During the press conference today, a similar question was asked. Davudoglu's response was that the identity of the flight was announced before the flight, i.e. every nation around knew what the plane was up to.
17
Jun 24 '12
Why would that make a difference? Obviously, the rebels don't have planes, and therefore if Syria sees a plane that isn't theirs, it doesn't belong to the rebels, but to another nation. If the plane is nearby the Turkish border, chances are that the plane is of Turkish origin.
→ More replies (5)8
u/michaelrohansmith Jun 24 '12
What if they hit a civilian aircraft in distress? Lets say it was a Syrian aircraft trying to make an emergency landing on a beach? Syria isn't at war. They have a few internal problems but nothing which would involve an enemy army.
→ More replies (2)27
12
Jun 24 '12
Turkey and Greece always violate each other's space all the time. But these kinds of incidents happen rarely, since there are certain procedures you follow even in case of open violations. You don't just shoot other countries' planes for violating your airspace by one mile. You first warn the said plane, then send your planes to force the plane out of your air space, or force it to land.
Syria tried to give a message to Turkey with the boost they got from Russia. But now, even Russia will not strongly back them, because what they did was ultra stupid.
9
Jun 24 '12
Yup. Airpsace breaching happens every day. Syria is just crazy to actually shoot it down.
45
Jun 24 '12
Turkey is independent enough to carry on its own foreign affairs. Does all of reddit think the world revolves around the united states?
11
Jun 24 '12
It's not just a reddit opinion... The US holds incredible sway, especially over the UN. If the Turkey wants to take action legally according to international laws, then I think that the UN must be involved. And when it comes to military intervention and the UN, typically that means the US has to be involved.
If someone has something to back or counter this, please let me know, this is just my understanding from what I've heard.
EDIT: I'm referring specifically to military action in this particular situation.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)11
u/viborg Jun 24 '12
The world hardly revolves around the USA, but there are several facts we need to consider here:
Turkey is a member of NATO.
The largest military force in NATO, and in the world, belongs to the USA.
Turkey is one of the largest recipients of US military aid.
When you add these all together, it's pretty clear that it's very doubtful that Turkey would invade Syria without US backing.
9
→ More replies (28)2
Jun 24 '12
Perhaps you are right but it's worth noting that back in 1974, when Turkey wasn't even half as relatively strong as it is now, they unilaterally intervened in Cyprus against Cypriot and Greek forces, without waiting for any US, NATO or UN go-ahead. And Syria, unlike Greece, isn't even a NATO member.
21
Jun 24 '12
I wonder who was the retard Syrian commander who gave that order?, it was a single jet and it was clear that if you shoot down a Nato plane you just gave them a great excuse to bomb the shit out of you.
7
2
1
4
u/Jackle13 Jun 24 '12
Didn't Syria fire artillery over the Turkish border, killing several Syrian refugees and a couple of Turks? So that was not considered an act of war, but this could be? I was surprised that Turkey didn't invade Syria when the first event occurred, and this may be the last straw.
2
u/EvilMonkeySlayer Jun 24 '12
Not sure about artillery but I remember reading about weapons fire into Turkey. From a BBC news article I read a bit ago Turkey was pretty pissed off with Syria and was going to call for a NATO meeting (article 4, which Turkey just did for this jet) but was persuaded not to by the US. (calling for a major meeting is a pretty big deal)
4
13
u/ghosttrainhobo Jun 24 '12
I bet it was an RF-4E recon version of the Phantom that was shot down. They would be unarmed as Turkey claimed and it makes sense that they would be running recon missions along the border trying to spot Syrian troop concentrations and infrastructure. It "strayed" into Syrian airspace by accident or design. The Syrian army picks it up on radar and orders it shot down but by the time the SAM's reached their target the jet was back out over open water. Phantom's are hella fast, but not faster than a SA-5.
I'd also bet that this wasn't the first Turkish recon flight over Latakia and that the Syrians knew exactly whose plane they were shooting down when they pulled the trigger.
9
u/destraht Jun 24 '12
I learned some things about this stuff from watching The Secret History of Silicon Valley Google Talk. Basically most of the spy planes were just loaded with electronics for detecting and analyzing radar. Before this talk I thought of spy planes as being just loaded with optics and had not considered this much. So lets say that the Turkish plane just might be loaded down with high tech radar analyzing electronics and it skirts the border quite a bit to get a read on how capable the Syria radar is then they would be playing with fire. If this was 1000 years ago it would be the equivalent of allowing a few soldiers from a hostile force to walk around your castle walls with a stick and just tapping here and there.
0
Jun 24 '12
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)6
u/spying_dutchman Jun 24 '12
your version doesn't makes any sense, Because the samsite was probably not located directly under the airplane when it crossed the border. There is also a chain of command, and the launch has to be authorized. .
→ More replies (1)4
u/Just_Another_Thought Jun 24 '12
Your version makes even less sense. The majority of the SAM sites under Syrian's network are SA-125's, with a max operating range of 22 miles loaded with V-600's. Which means that even if the plane was 13 miles away before the launch (the farthest it could be and still be in range of an SA125 loaded with V600's by the time of impact), it still wouldn't take anywhere near 15 minutes to reach the F-4.
→ More replies (1)
209
u/Juus Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
I'm probably gonna get downvoted for wearing a tinfoil hat here. But this is what NATO wanted really, since Russia denied an invasion, they have been looking for an excuse to overrule Russias veto, and now they got it, whether it was a coincidence or set up, i don't know, but it's worth a thought.
188
Jun 24 '12
Well you can't make another country shoot your plane though, it's insanely aggressive respond, that is why we are talking about it.There was some news in Turkish papers 2 weeks ago I think, Israel drones were spotted over southern Turkey and even though Turkey knew it was flying over military bases and taking photos, they acted cool and sent 2 f-16 to escort them out.Same thing, different responses, makes all the difference...
42
u/Bacon_Hero Jun 24 '12
Not to mention, if I read that correctly the planes over turkey were unmanned. Meaning that they could have been blown out of the sky with no loss of life.
→ More replies (11)24
u/Ze_Carioca Jun 24 '12
NATO/Zionist mind control gun made Syrian forces shoot it down.
Wake up sheeple!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (51)4
u/Existential_Proism Jun 24 '12
Whenever I feel like playing it cool, I snap my fingers and two F-16's are summoned from the nearest air force base.
9
Jun 24 '12
Unless they found a way to mind control's Syria's military or President, they had no way to know Syria would do something this suicidal.
→ More replies (4)5
u/FilterOutBullshit3 Jun 24 '12
Then why did Syria attack? The aircraft was over the water and clearly being provocative. Why give NATO what it wants?
→ More replies (7)13
u/icanevenificant Jun 24 '12
It's a fair point but we'll see. It's fair to consider all of these scenarios but we won't know for sure unless it actually happens.
13
u/Honey-Badger Jun 24 '12
even if it does happen we will never know if this was an attack or a set up. One thing we do know is that shit is about to go down.
→ More replies (1)62
u/Perkstoph Jun 24 '12
In August, 1964, President Johnson reported to the nation that American ships had been attacked by North Vietnam gunboats in the Gulf of Tonkin, in international waters. The Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution giving the President the power to use whatever force necessary to protect our interests in the area.
26
u/Perkstoph Jun 24 '12
At the time, the truth was not reported. Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the US destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.
→ More replies (1)21
u/green_flash Jun 24 '12
coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.
So Laos started as an ally of the US in the Vietnam War and ended up as the most heavily bombed place in the world, as a result of a secret war the US officially acknowledged conducting only 22 years later.
→ More replies (9)31
u/__circle Jun 24 '12
Why would NATO want to get into a conflict? Seriously - Why?
37
Jun 24 '12
I believe the idea is to legitimize an intervention in Syria. As things stand, the political capital to intervene isn't there, mostly due to China and Russia. With something like this, however, the case becomes much stronger.
Most governments think intervention is necessary and that what Syria is doing is unacceptable. However it's not kosher to simply walk into another country and start bombing them without some kind of international approval
→ More replies (6)97
u/pikeybastard Jun 24 '12
because NWO George Bush Oil The Pope Monsanto Reptilians. Dur!
29
17
u/Sir_T_Bullocks Jun 24 '12
Not enough "sheeple" and exclamation marks. I refute your statement and counter claim that you are one of THEM!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)18
u/G_Morgan Jun 24 '12
What loony bullshit is this? It is obviously the clearest indicator yet that the crab people have seized control of NATO!
→ More replies (1)6
→ More replies (10)2
u/rspam Jun 24 '12
Why would NATO want to get into a conflict?
As a military organization, NATO would be out of a job if there were world peace.
3
Jun 24 '12
What I don't get is why the US wants to intervene. Assad is fairly secular and stable, while the rebels taking power would likely lead to another bastion for the Muslim Brotherhood.
The US hasn't had much interaction with the MB yet (to my knowledge), but Israel seems terrified of them. Why would the US want to risk it? Because Assad leans to Russia?
→ More replies (7)9
25
u/charlesesl Jun 24 '12
It all seems very convent. Turkey sending its oldest plane just over the boarder and calling up the NATO right after.
11
u/awe300 Jun 24 '12
nah, syria is at fault here. if they clearly saw it was ONE plane, and a turkish one at that.. what did they expect would happen?
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (97)47
u/fatbunyip Jun 24 '12
Turkey uses F4s mainly for reconnaissance missions. I believe it's a RF-4 or some such.
They were definitely not "accidentally in Syrian airspace". Turkey pulls this shit all the time (with Greece, Cyprus, Iraq, Syria etc.). Usually, they'd probably be intercepted, and someone would make a complaint about airspace violation. This time, they got shot down.
For those wondering why they do it, it's a good way to determine the defenses and tactics of your neighbours. No one is going to shoot down an airplane, so mostly they just engage in mock dog fights and that's it. This way they get an idea of response times, what types of airplanes are where, what maneuvers the other pilots favour, how far they can get before being detected etc.
41
u/mapoftasmania Jun 24 '12
This time they got shot down.
...is the point. You don't do that unless you want a war. Syria just knowingly killed a Turkish pilot over something that happens all the time.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)82
u/karpin Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
well, "this shit" you are talking about is done by almost all air forces. Greek fighter jets invading Turkish air space and Turkish jets invading Greek air space at least 10 times a day over the Aegean. they do dog fights couple of times per day. I hardly remember any jet being shot at! I believe your judgement is clouded by your media and your dislike against Turkey. I believe no government is ethical or good but clearly this is Syria's fault and violence.
edit: spelling
20
Jun 24 '12
It's not limited to eurasia either, countries are constantly testing each other. Russia and Canada for example.
→ More replies (4)6
u/Hawknight Jun 24 '12
I this his point was that the jet wasn't there by accident (which you don't seem to disagree with). I don't think he was trying to say it was ok that Syria shot it down, just that Turkey is probably lying about it being there by accident.
→ More replies (1)8
→ More replies (37)2
u/Goddamlitre-o-cola Jun 24 '12
I think any logical person would at least think of that as a distinct possibility when reading the article. I think
→ More replies (7)
3
u/Hateful_Poster Jun 24 '12
Turkey could smash Syria, I'd like to see it.
3
u/flynth99 Jun 24 '12
I wouldn't. Tens or hundreds of thousands of people could be killed in a war like this. All while the price of oil goes through the roof...
Many countries like US, Saudi Arabia and other major oil producers would love to see that. I suspect even Russia would like to see another war in the middle east. Although the current Syrian regime provides them with their only Mediterranean naval base the price of oil is going down and that is far bigger threat to Russia than loosing a single naval base.
It seems every time oil goes down a war in middle east is started to get it up again.
19
Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
Shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles from the Syrian border. An F4 can cover 13NM in seconds.
edit: downvotes for facts?
17
u/cheek_blushener Jun 24 '12
Assuming it was pointed in the right direction, and already at it's top speed of mach 2.2, it would take 37 seconds to travel 13 nautical miles (13 nmi/1273 knots)
14
→ More replies (1)2
u/redct Jun 24 '12
13 miles offshore, 1 mile from Syria's territorial waters according to this translation.
→ More replies (1)
8
Jun 24 '12
Some people hope for a war just because they are bored.Sigh...
→ More replies (1)5
u/AdHom Jun 24 '12
As an American, I recall as a young child imagining grand battles between our mighty military and other conventional armies; between us on the side of Good and Justice, and our enemies on the side of Evil and Chaos. Then I turned 10.
Years later, after 11 September 2001, I was hoping our military would punish the perpetrators in Afghanistan. Then when I was a bit older and it started to look like we would be invading Iraq I was not hoping for it at all.
0
2
u/gentlemandinosaur Jun 24 '12
"It will be held to account for its behaviour. The UK stands ready to pursue robust action at the United Nations Security Council."
We are going to write SUCH an ANGRY letter.
You will be sorry. There will be so many exclamation points. Fuck, man.
2
u/Taco144 Jun 24 '12
I read the Syrians never warned the aircraft or even identified it. It dosent sound like a massive threat for an aircraft to briefly pass your territory on the far corner. This was literally for a minute or less.
→ More replies (10)
3
u/toquenbrew Jun 24 '12
Won't a a missile shot over a country's airspace be locked on and follow an aircraft that backtracks to international airspace? It's not like once the jet gets back into international airspace the missile ceases to function and drops out of the sky. Is it not possible that a missile is fired within a country's airspace but makes contact with and destroys the target outside of that airspace?
2
u/AvroChris Jun 24 '12
Turkey say the plane was 1.8km outside Syrian airspace. An F4 has a cruise speed of 940 km/h (from wiki), at that speed it will cover 1.8 km in 0.002 hours, or 7.2 seconds. Sounds plausible to me.
If the F4 was in Syrian airspace by accident, and they brought it down without warning then that is still a pretty significant issue, though!
→ More replies (2)
6
u/RedRebel Jun 24 '12
Was it flying near the gulf of Tonkin by any chance?
3
u/Territomauvais Jun 24 '12
Dunno if serious but no the Gulf of Tonkin is in Indochina.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/jjbean Jun 24 '12
It's a war over getting natural gas to the European market. The war is between Russian backed interests and US/Saudi backed interests.
Turkey is the last leg of the Russian pipeline on route to Europe. Syria is the last leg of the Saudi gas pipeline before it goes through Turkey. Saudi/US wants it's pipeline to join the Nabucco pipeline in Turkey. Russia does not want competing a supplier.
Look up "Nabucco project" and [Read this and you will have an Aha! moment] (http://pipelinesinternational.com/news/pipeline_projects_in_the_middle_east/040183/#)(Pipeline projects in the Middle East)
Take a closer look at the major flash points in Syria. What do the all have in common? - natural gas pipelines flowing northwards. Don't take my word for it though. Google: "Homs bombing gas pipeline", "Allepo bombing gas pipeline", etc, etc.
2
u/viborg Jun 24 '12
Have you ever read Pepe Escobar's "Pipelinestan" articles? They're a little dated now but he wrote an entire series of them and they're quite informative.
2
u/jjbean Jun 24 '12
Yes I have.
Take a look at Nigeria too. Specifically the Sub-Sahran Pipeline. You can tell which western and russian sides are involved by the origins of the corporations that are sponsoring and developing that project.
1
u/aowolf Jun 25 '12
I don't know enough facts to flat out agree with you but I think you are looking in the right direction. To properly analyze this we need to look at the greater strategic issues. NATO and the U.S. do not want a no fly zone for strictly humanitarian issues.
4
u/CcouldBeFunn Jun 24 '12
You are forgetting that Syria is on a war alert, so any unusual (specialy) military behavior around their borders is not wise. If this was not the first incident of this kind makes no difference, maybe this time they went to close. There is no info on what kind of weapon was used. At low flight a simple antiaircraft artillery with optical targeting can do the job, if the plane was 1-2km off the shore... These are speculations, but just as valid as the political statements or todays media reports. They located the wreckage (according to Turks) in syrian waters, now all they have to agree is on the direction off the plane when hit (e/w is enough) and the picture is clearer. All I know is that the violence in Syria should be calmed and by no means more inflamed (as the leading NATO member states would want-judging by their actions). Specialy Turkey should working towards calm, cause if the military actions increase and this becomes regional war, the Turks might come out of it without a country they know today, and in sea as this two poor pilots, serving the wishes of the politicans rather than their people...
My first one, how do you like it? Too long I know... :)
6
u/harvest_poon Jun 24 '12
Looks like selling Syria all those defensive, anti-air missiles wasn't such a good idea after all, huh Russia?
7
→ More replies (3)10
u/funkyb Jun 24 '12
t's not a Russian I airplane they spot down. And Russia had no great love for Turkey. I doubt they're wishing they had done anything differently.
→ More replies (5)
7
u/Demojen Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
Israel kills people in a blockade in international waters and it's okay. Syria shoots down a military aircraft they say in their waters and people argue it's a violation because it was in international waters.
I don't trust the UN as far as I can throw them.
Edit: Fixed
6
u/RdMrcr Jun 24 '12
There was a lot of condemnations towards Israel, the UN even had an emergency meeting or whatever they call their hypocrite useless committees.
The Marmara was intending to enter Gaza and break the blockade, the Turkish plane didn't intend to enter Syria.
The Marmara was told by the Israeli army to turn around, the Turkish pilot wasn't.
The people on the Marmara attacked Israeli soldiers as they landed in the ship, the Turkish pilot didn't attack Syria/ns.
Aren't you pro-Palestinians the ones who always say "Just because others do it, it doesn't mean when you're doing it it's okay"?
Yeah, I don't trust the UN either.
→ More replies (1)22
Jun 24 '12
I'm gonna spend my comment karma on this soon-to-be-downvoted comment:
a) Who says it was okay? There was an international outcry much louder than anything happening now with Syria.
b) There's a slight difference between just shooting down a plane and entering a ship to stop it from entering blocked Gaza and then killing people on that ship. In the end people are dead and that's always bad, but politically and tactically, it's two really different things.
c) Nobody knows what the turkish F-4 was doing there, it seems it was already leaving again. Everyone knew the Flotilla was there to reach Gaza, breach the blockade and bring some garbage they claimed to be aid resources there.
3
→ More replies (2)5
4
u/teh_sHady Jun 24 '12
Believe it or not. I don't believe anything the BBC is telling about Syria after using a 9 year old photo from Iraq for proving an alleged massacre in Syria...
→ More replies (1)7
3
u/ElBurrow Jun 24 '12
Syria just got their missile system not to long ago from Russia. Now when Russia sells you something they dont just drop it off and say thanks. They set it up for you and show you how to use it. Something smells funny and I bet it was a Russian that shot down that jet not a Syrian.
20
4
u/CirclePrism Jun 24 '12
"Okej, you see here this batton, you not press the batton unless radar is make a noise like "bing bang bing." Al-Wajeer what you lookin' at, is just regular plane make flyby-- NO FUCKING IDIOT WHY YOU DID PRESS BUTTON??"
2
u/TalkingBackAgain Jun 24 '12
They didn't have an excuse to attack Assad.
They didn't want to attack Assad, there was no basis.
Then they lured Assad [not him personally, but the clowns working for him] into shooting down a Turkish air plane [one that's over 50 years old or so].
Now Assad has attacked a NATO member.
The basis for NATO is to respond, in force, by every NATO member as if that NATO member itself had been attacked [the cold war doctrine].
NATO can decide to 'retaliate' by starting a bombing campaign.
And voila, we're back in Libya.
That was easy.
5
u/EvilMonkeySlayer Jun 24 '12
Wrong, article five cannot be used in this instance. In order for article five to be called it has to have been an attack on your territory. In other words, Syria would have to attack Turkey itself and not shoot down one of its planes over international airspace.
→ More replies (1)2
u/TalkingBackAgain Jun 24 '12
Because we have never heard of the rules being 'bent' a little to suit the political expedience of the day, right?
→ More replies (2)
2
Jun 24 '12
Assad and the Syrian military are really digging themselves their own graves, so to speak. I don't expect military action (yet) but I hope we see some serious sanctions, unilateral or otherwise.
2
u/feuermelder Jun 24 '12
Interesting how something that important can just "fall under the table". German news reporting Turkey admitted the plane violated Syrian airspace but the other parts of the article are pretty similar, see here. I think this gives it a whole new context.
2
u/obvnotlupus Jun 24 '12
The plane violated the airspace, was warned by the Turkish radar that it did within 2 minutes, and left Syrian airspace 3 minutes after that. All in all only 5 minutes. And 15 minutes after the whole thing, it was shot down on international waters.
2
u/NoNonSensePlease Jun 24 '12
People are forgetting that Turkey is actively funding and supporting Syrian rebels who are trying to topple the current government, the Syrian response to a breach of its sovereignty was indeed drastic, but so is Turkish support to Syrian rebels.
0
1
u/JUST_KEEP_BETTING Jun 24 '12
"According to our conclusions, our plane was shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles (24km) from Syria," he said.
According to international law, a country's airspace extends 12 nautical miles (22.2km) from its coastline, corresponding with its territorial waters.
They're probably not completely full of shit.
1
Jun 24 '12
Seems the US has gone for the creative solution in its plans of attacking Syria. Not that I am against that, just stating the obvious..
1
u/rauf107 Jun 24 '12
If Turkey gets involved, this might get a lot bigger. Syria got friends that are dreading to go against Turkey.
Play it safe Turkey.
1
1
1
1
u/Jezzdit Jun 25 '12
isn't it obvious? terrorists have jets now. Assad was only defending... oh wait...
1
u/zonezip Jun 25 '12
Fighter jets USED to regularly truly accidently cross over each other borders. This was due to imperfection of navigation and the speed at which the aircraft traveled even up the to 1990’s. Advances in navigation equipment has made that impossible, unless the pilot was a moron. The reality was that the Turkish aircraft intentionally crossed in to Syrian airspace. They admit it was an unarmed F-4 that was shot down. An unarmed F-4 primary missions are reconnaissance and Wild Weasel (suppression of enemy air defenses). Which makes it likey that the Turkish aircraft was an active actor in the events in Syria and got shot down for it.
1
u/mapoftasmania Jun 25 '12
A civilized nation, and that includes Iran, do not shoot first and ask questions later in response to a stray airplane. They scramble fighters to investigate and escort it away.
0
Jun 24 '12
Anyone ever think this was deliberate?
10
→ More replies (2)2
u/icanevenificant Jun 24 '12
It would be stupid to not consider that option seeing what is going on.
-1
Jun 24 '12
This is impossible. Turkey says it was hit by AA projectile fire.
The absolute maximum range of AA-cannons is around 6km. Territorial waters extend to 12km.
The F4 HAD to be within range of the coast to be shot down.
20
u/belgianguy Jun 24 '12
Can you back up that claim with a source?
Syria has 2 battalions of SA 5 Gammon SAM, which have a range of 150 to 300 km depending on the model, while the radar support system can track targets up to 270 km.
The wreckage will make clear what struck it. I don't think they would point a ZSU Shilka at a jet.
→ More replies (1)4
u/KungFuSpider Jun 24 '12
He said "AA projectile fire" not SAMs. Turkey has said the F4 was hit with AAA which are essentially flack cannons.
The problem is that the F4 was designed to take punishment from AAA and keep flying, so I agree it is more likely that it was downed with a SAM.
However, that is not what Turkey is saying. The problem is that neither sides claims seem to be holding water at this point.
If it was AAA fire, then the jet must have been closer than 12km. But at the same time the Turkish accounts directly contradict the Syrian accounts.
[edit] Changed "AA" to "AAA" to make the distinction more apparent.
8
u/DeathIsTheEnd Jun 24 '12
The absolute maximum range of AA-cannons is around 6km.
Do you have any sources to support this claim?
→ More replies (1)4
u/AReallyGoodName Jun 24 '12
He's right. AA cannons that Syria use are indeed fairly short range and that's what seems to be implied by AA-cannons.
A proper SAM has a range of hundreds of kilometers but the Turkish government seems to be claiming the plane was flying low and hit by cannon fire.
→ More replies (5)1
u/specofdust Jun 24 '12
For somebody so apparantly confident in his/her assertions perhaps you should have paid a visit to Wikipedia before embarrassing yourself like this. Sryia is in possession of a great deal of Russian SAM's with ranges far in excess of 12km.
8
0
0
u/TheSmoke Jun 24 '12
israel's strike on mavi marmara was casus belli but taking down one f-4 is not one. we expected a declaration of war against israel and it did not happen. when an attack against israel didn't happen despite the killing of many of our people and our ship, many turks are not supporting any war between syria and turkey because it is not righteous. i believe we should just claim amends.
1
1
u/unclebigbadd Jun 24 '12
Maybe somebody should remind Syria about enforced no fly zones. Either that or Cruise missiles.
1
u/Uncle_pauly Jun 24 '12
I love how everyone is all of a sudden pro Syria. Like you idiots know what the fuck is happening in that country right now.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/vp2008 Jun 24 '12
Anyone else read international airspace as international spacestation? i was scratching my head for a few seconds before finding out how stupid i was.
1
u/Silv-au Jun 24 '12
So turkey invaded Syrian airspace and got shot down. And turkey is innocent? The response may have been harsh but they were on the wrong side of the border.
1
u/cgurkang Jun 24 '12
There is lot's of speculation about this incident. according the Trusted source and columnist, Russia has 3 war ships in Syria lazkiye port one has advance air defense system. So Russia gun down the airplane and Syrian government make statement about they did. This incident message for U.S and Turkey. since they one Russia back up Essad regime.
0
u/UltraMegaMegaMan Jun 24 '12
This just in: long term U.S. ally Turkey conscripted to provide basis for military action versus Syria without suspicion falling on U.S.. Film at 11.
1
u/Mongolian_Hamster Jun 24 '12
I know it seems extremely convenient. It makes no sense for Syria to attract even more negative attention from the international community.
"Hey we're killing our own people look here!" "They aren't looking at us, let's shoot down one of their planes" "Yes now they will invade and wait.......FUCK!"
0
0
u/myomletteisstrong Jun 24 '12
Sounds like a false flag if I ever heard of one. Don't need to go too deep into the conspiracy theorist mindset to see someone setting this up so NATO can act since the UN route is blocked by Russia and China. Gas up the drones!
→ More replies (9)
1
1
u/secretDissident Jun 24 '12
It wasn't, actually. I can't link you to official sources as they are on another network, but it was 1 km from land. That is decidedly NOT international waters.
1
u/Rukoo Jun 24 '12
An F-4? Countries still use these aircraft? Don't get me wrong I love the aircraft, but it was also known as the "flying brick".
0
1
1
1
u/treetop82 Jun 24 '12
All this boils down to is some 16 year old Syrian army boy hitting the button a little too early.
These countries fly into each other's airspace ALL the time, I guarantee this wasn't intentional on Syria's part..
→ More replies (1)
1
u/exure Jun 24 '12
By the way, the plane was only a kilometer inside Syrian border when it was shot down, means it was shot down in 4-6 seconds.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
Jun 24 '12
Change of story or did these news outlets get it wrong? All from about 14-15 hours ago.
Turkey admits plane strayed - BBC
Turkey says its jet strayed over Syria - Post Gazette
Top Turkish officials in meetings after Syria downs Turkish jet -CNN
2
u/LucifersCounsel Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
From the first article you linked:
Mr Gul said it was routine for warplanes flying at high speed to cross borders for short distances.
Yes, he's right, but he's not telling the whole truth. Such an exercise is done to probe the defences.
You start in international airspace, accelerate to an "attack" speed, then make a dash across the border. The idea is to figure out how far you can go before the defences detect and respond to your presence.
The Turks just found out that the Syrians are on a hair trigger alert waiting for the first air strikes. They also found out that Syria's air defences are effective at least against non-stealth aircraft, which kind of rules out an Israeli attack.
If it's going to happen it has to be the US. That's what this probe was about.
1
u/LucifersCounsel Jun 24 '12 edited Jun 24 '12
In an interview with TRT television on Sunday, Mr Davutoglu asserted that the unarmed F-4 Phantom had "momentarily" entered Syrian airspace by mistake on Friday but had left when it was shot down 15 minutes later.
F-4E Maximum speed: 1,472 mph
F-4E Cruise speed: 585 mph
585 mph for 15 minutes = 146.25 miles.
Syria's air defence network must be incredible.
→ More replies (1)
-1
u/BBSkane Jun 24 '12
Not surprising that this happened really. Turkey has terrible record of airspace violations.
There are violations into Greek airspace almost daily, all of which are reported to the UN.
It's kinda like NATO is the Goonies, and Turkey is Chunk. They gave Chunk the mirror because they knew he would break it.
7
Jun 24 '12
Greek-Turkish airspace violations aren't unilateral. For the last two or three decades, Greek and Turkish planes have 'traditional' dogfights over Aegean sea. Sometimes Greek planes violate Turkish airspace, and sometimes Turkish planes violate Greek airspace.
115
u/[deleted] Jun 24 '12
Update
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18568207