mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Nov 27, 2015 0:51:03 GMT -5
Aw, someone changed the thread title! LOL! I guess VB got tired of the armed turkey jokes taking his thread off topic!
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Nov 27, 2015 7:39:38 GMT -5
Aw, someone changed the thread title! LOL! I guess VB got tired of the armed turkey jokes taking his thread off topic! Any other week of the year, the title could have stood on it's own. This week, not so much Side note: Indiana basically had killed off the wild turkey back in the 1950's or so. Due to restocking efforts, hunters harvested over 11,000 this year. Some agricultural areas have 25 birds per square mile. And did anyone know, Florida had a black bear hunt this fall? The hunt was supposed to last a week, but hunters were so successful, they stopped the hunt in one weekend because the quota was reached.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Nov 27, 2015 8:07:58 GMT -5
Aw, someone changed the thread title! Had to. Too much left wing political pressure was being applied. Hint: the wing of the bird...... Remember, Franklin wanted the turkey as our national bird
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Nov 27, 2015 8:19:08 GMT -5
So much for actually discussing the nation of Turkey and Russian fighter jets and another step towards WWIII
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Nov 27, 2015 8:34:58 GMT -5
Sorry Sir!
Luckily the Russians have reacted in a measured fashion, and this will hopefully be dialed down. Do you think someone pulled the Turks aside at that NATO meeting (where public pronouncements of support by all for Turkey were given, as is proper per alliance protocol) and gave them one hell of a dope slap? Hope so, I imagine it was pointed out to them, they were the actual "aggressive party" in the incident. Granted Russia was not innocent in this, but to shoot it down? IDK
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 27, 2015 10:24:26 GMT -5
I wouldn't say the move was reckless or stupid after reading the article. As they point out: if you warn somebody to get out of your airspace, get out of your airspace, get out of your airspace, and they continue to violate your airspace, you really have no choice but to start shooting down their planes. Do you not agree? Yes, I think it was both reckless and stupid.
I think a better option would have been to scramble Turkish fighter jets to escort the Russian bomber out of Turkish airspace, and let the Russians know that they could well have blown the plane out of the sky.
From reading the article though I get a better sense of a couple of other motivations that the Turks had. I understand the action better. I still think it was the wrong way to deal with the infraction.
I believe they actually did that on a previous occasion. They didn't escort the bomber, but they scrambled jets to shoot it down. The bomber veered out of Turkish airspace. The Russians still didn't learn their lesson.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 27, 2015 15:18:53 GMT -5
I believe they actually did that on a previous occasion. They didn't escort the bomber, but they scrambled jets to shoot it down. The bomber veered out of Turkish airspace. The Russians still didn't learn their lesson. So scramble them again. It was a reckless action to shoot it out of the sky. i heard that Russia was only in Turkish airspace for 2-3 SECONDS. how do you ask them to leave 10x in that amount of time? someone is lying.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 27, 2015 16:55:43 GMT -5
I believe they actually did that on a previous occasion. They didn't escort the bomber, but they scrambled jets to shoot it down. The bomber veered out of Turkish airspace. The Russians still didn't learn their lesson. So scramble them again. It was a reckless action to shoot it out of the sky. I guess time will tell. All I can say is that if a foreign leader invaded my sovereign airspace to bomb my brethren after I'd escorted a bomber away on a previous mission, I'd consider it my moral imperative to repay blood for blood.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 0:54:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2015 22:34:59 GMT -5
Sorry Sir!
Luckily the Russians have reacted in a measured fashion, and this will hopefully be dialed down. Do you think someone pulled the Turks aside at that NATO meeting (where public pronouncements of support by all for Turkey were given, as is proper per alliance protocol) and gave them one hell of a dope slap? Hope so, I imagine it was pointed out to them, they were the actual "aggressive party" in the incident. Granted Russia was not innocent in this, but to shoot it down? IDK Wait... I thought a Russian aircraft invaded Turkish airspace first (ETA: after Russia had already been warned to NOT do that again). Which would make Russia the "aggressive party". Or is that not what happened?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 30, 2015 4:26:52 GMT -5
I discussed this with a friend over the weekend. I didn't realize how many lies Turkey has already been caught in regarding this issue. Firstly, unless the bomber's intent was to bomb targets inside Turkish territory, the story about the repeated warnings for the bomber to divert from Turkish airspace are false. The geometry of the region the jet was passing over dictates that for the jet to pass through without stalling out, the transit would have taken at most 17 seconds, which is the duration of the transit reported by Russia. Secondly, it's confirmed that Russia sent NATO details of the bomber's intended flight plan at least a week in advance of the transit. Notice that I say "NATO" rather than "Turkey". There's some question as to whether the NATO officials (Americans, as it turned out) passed on the information to Turkey or not. If not, it's reasonable to conclude that American officials were partly responsible for the plane being shot down. Given the US government's history of stirring up strife and contention, especially in Turkey, this raises the question of whether the flight plan was intentionally withheld. Unfortunately, US foreign policy has gone so totally off the rails in recent years that it's not an unreasonable question. We can be certain that Pres. Putin and Russian intelligence are asking it, at any rate. Thirdly, it's debatable whether the peninsula (in the sense of the border "sticking out" into Syria) the jet transited over is even Turkish territory. The land has apparently been contested for decades. It's not land that Turkey should be trigger happy about defending. Finally, there's reasonable speculation by Russian journalists that the shooting was punishment for Russia's bombing of facilities lucrative to the Turkish government. To wit: One rather unusual version put forward by experts immediately after the Russian Su-24 was downed – was the desire of Ankara to “punish” Russia for its massive air strikes on oil refineries and columns of ISIS fuel tankers transporting oil products into Turkey.
After all, Ankara, while claiming to be supporting the NATO operation against ISIS, was in fact buying oil, at dumping prices, coming from areas controlled by radical Islamists. If indeed this flow was significantly large, then of course it was extremely beneficial for the state authorities of Turkey, and possibly for a number of senior officials and military personnel in President Erdogan’s entourage. It is not surprising that the actions of Russian bomber pilots made them panic. In any case, Pres. Ergodan of Turkey has already been caught in lies three times regarding the incident, hence I'm leaning towards Turkey being the aggressor in this case. That might very well be why the rest of NATO is distancing themselves from him on this issue. I'm so sick of reading stories out of "reputable" western sources, trusting what they say, then discovering a world of facts they didn't bother to report or outright lied about. Lies and propaganda, more and more. And they wonder why people are taking their chances in the savage wilds of the blogosphere.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Nov 30, 2015 8:03:55 GMT -5
Hope so, I imagine it was pointed out to them, they were the actual "aggressive party" in the incident. Granted Russia was not innocent in this, but to shoot it down? IDK Wait... I thought a Russian aircraft invaded Turkish airspace first (ETA: after Russia had already been warned to NOT do that again). Which would make Russia the "aggressive party". Or is that not what happened? We have had Russian jets playing games on our west coast. We did not shoot them down or escalate. Russia might have been "aggressive" Turkey shot it down making Turkey the only real "aggressor". Turkey's warnings to the jet lasted, what, twenty seconds? And since the jet came down in Syria, obviously just skirting the border. I get it that Russia was probing and probably provoking Turkey
|
|
Spellbound454
Senior Member
"In the end, we remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends"
Joined: Sept 9, 2011 17:28:42 GMT -5
Posts: 3,987
|
Post by Spellbound454 on Nov 30, 2015 14:24:57 GMT -5
I think Virgils conclusion is probably right.....(and I can access lots of sources from here)
Someone is buying IS oil and funding their operation...the consensus is that Erdogan is lying and its going through the Southern Turkish border.
NATO and the EU needs Turkey though.......NATO for launching strikes and the EU for keeping refugees there...... so they don't flood Europe. (They are getting EU membership in return for this)
There has been arguments and sanctions but I think the plan is "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer still"
We already know they are not to be trusted.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 0:54:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2015 18:41:16 GMT -5
Wait... I thought a Russian aircraft invaded Turkish airspace first (ETA: after Russia had already been warned to NOT do that again). Which would make Russia the "aggressive party". Or is that not what happened? We have had Russian jets playing games on our west coast. We did not shoot them down or escalate.Russia might have been "aggressive" Turkey shot it down making Turkey the only real "aggressor". Turkey's warnings to the jet lasted, what, twenty seconds? And since the jet came down in Syria, obviously just skirting the border. I get it that Russia was probing and probably provoking Turkey Outside our airspace... or in it?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 0:54:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2015 20:48:32 GMT -5
For the record, all my statements are on the assumption that the Russian jets (plural, so it includes both previously violating ones that caused warnings to be issued AND the one that was actually shot down) DID violate Turkish airspace.
It's not a question of "how long were they there?" It's a question of "did they, or didn't they?"
I don't care if they were in the Russian equivalent of an SR-71 "Blackbird" flying at 2,200MPH (covering the approximately 8,000 feet of traverse {where the Russian jet crossed into, and then exited Turkish airspace} in ~2.47933 seconds)... entering a country's airspace (without some provable "in flight emergency"... which no one, not even Russia, has claimed was the case here) after being warned not to is a "hostile" act.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,499
|
Post by Tennesseer on Nov 30, 2015 21:02:22 GMT -5
For the record, all my statements are on the assumption that the Russian jets (plural, so it includes both previously violating ones that caused warnings to be issued AND the one that was actually shot down) DID violate Turkish airspace. It's not a question of "how long were they there?" It's a question of "did they, or didn't they?" I don't care if they were in the Russian equivalent of an SR-71 "Blackbird" flying at 2,200MPH (covering the approximately 8,000 feet of traverse {where the Russian jet crossed into, and then exited Turkish airspace} in ~2.47933 seconds)... entering a country's airspace (without some provable "in flight emergency"... which no one, not even Russia, has claimed was the case here) after being warned not to is a "hostile" act. For what little it is worth, the spit of Turkey's territory the Russian jet flew across is something like two miles wide, or so I heard on national news. So it is not surprising the jet crashed in Syria as it would have continued moving once hit. The same would hold true for where the crew landed once they ejected..
|
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Nov 30, 2015 22:47:17 GMT -5
In any case, Pres. Ergodan of Turkey has already been caught in lies three times regarding the incident, hence I'm leaning towards Turkey being the aggressor in this case. That might very well be why the rest of NATO is distancing themselves from him on this issue. I'm so sick of reading stories out of "reputable" western sources, trusting what they say, then discovering a world of facts they didn't bother to report or outright lied about. Lies and propaganda, more and more. And they wonder why people are taking their chances in the savage wilds of the blogosphere. I look at it like I am so sick of our govt trusting our foreign "allies." For the most part I have never trusted any foreign govt outside of The UK/Europe. I was naive when it came to Putin's intentions, and now he will go down as the dumbest leader in history. The biggest point being; thinking he could restore the Russian empire and allowing the Jihad to spread across Europe and now it's all the way into North Africa and Central/SE Asia. Now that Ergodan is in Turkey, it has become the biggest two faced allied we have had for a long time. It's too bad too because Turkey was really an example that could have been followed. At least we have the armor that beats the sword.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 0:54:52 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2015 23:37:39 GMT -5
For the record, all my statements are on the assumption that the Russian jets (plural, so it includes both previously violating ones that caused warnings to be issued AND the one that was actually shot down) DID violate Turkish airspace. It's not a question of "how long were they there?" It's a question of "did they, or didn't they?" I don't care if they were in the Russian equivalent of an SR-71 "Blackbird" flying at 2,200MPH (covering the approximately 8,000 feet of traverse {where the Russian jet crossed into, and then exited Turkish airspace} in ~2.47933 seconds)... entering a country's airspace (without some provable "in flight emergency"... which no one, not even Russia, has claimed was the case here) after being warned not to is a "hostile" act. For what little it is worth, the spit of Turkey's territory the Russian jet flew across is something like two miles wide, or so I heard on national news. So it is not surprising the jet crashed in Syria as it would have continued moving once hit. The same would hold true for where the crew landed once they ejected.. Yup. Roughly the same as if a Canadian Air Force plane were to fly over the right area of Northern Minnesota (say, for example, near: Angle Inlet, flying either Southwest or Northeast from Canada to Canada and crossing that little "tip"). *Note: I don't believe we'd shoot down a Canadian Air Force plane... just using that country's military and our border as an example.
|
|