Il-20 shot down near Syria

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
Looks like Natanyahu and Putin spoke on the phone, and Russia is backtracking from their strong language on this indecent.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Israel was not responsible for the downing of a Russian military aircraft during a strike on Syria Monday night. "It looks like a chain of tragic circumstances, because the Israeli plane didn't shoot down our jet," he said.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke on the phone with Putin and expressed his condolences, but added that the responsibility for the downing of the Russian plane rests with Syria. He also reiterated that Israel is determined to prevent Iran from gaining a military foothold in Syria and thwart Tehran's attempts to aid Hezbollah with lethal weapons against Israel.

Haaretz

The Russian bluster is getting a little old they sure like back talking.

originally posted by: BigDave-AR

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
Looks like Natanyahu and Putin spoke on the phone, and Russia is backtracking from their strong language on this indecent.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Israel was not responsible for the downing of a Russian military aircraft during a strike on Syria Monday night. "It looks like a chain of tragic circumstances, because the Israeli plane didn't shoot down our jet," he said.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke on the phone with Putin and expressed his condolences, but added that the responsibility for the downing of the Russian plane rests with Syria. He also reiterated that Israel is determined to prevent Iran from gaining a military foothold in Syria and thwart Tehran's attempts to aid Hezbollah with lethal weapons against Israel.

Haaretz

The Russian bluster is getting a little old they sure like back talking.

They always have. They know they can't take it too far, they have put a lot of skin in the game for Assad to stay in power.

If the tipping point comes to the west just taking out the regime they did it all for nothing. So I suppose it's in Israels best interest Russia turns a blind eye to their actions against Iran, in return Israel doesn't go out of their way to hit Syrian troops (though they are collateral damage from time to time with their close proximity to Iranians).

This issue is a desperate provocation from some "loser power". I don't think that they are going to get anything they want !
Who orchestrated this provocation at this moment is probably completely delusional and the outcome of it ... will surprise the provocateurs !

a reply to: Flanker86

You mean like the time you said Russia would completely destroy all the NATO forces in Syria?

a reply to: Flanker86

And which "loser power" would that be?

a reply to: anzha

*slide whistle*

*rimshot*

Yea fair shout. But I would have thought they would have given a little more notice than 60 seconds.


a reply to: JIMC5499

originally posted by: Flanker86
This issue is a desperate provocation from some "loser power". I don't think that they are going to get anything they want !
Who orchestrated this provocation at this moment is probably completely delusional and the outcome of it ... will surprise the provocateurs !

bot net talking botsh1t

a reply to: Barnalby

O

A little more info:

russiamil.wordpress.com...

It makes no difference if Syrian or Israel missiles destroyed the Russian plane because all strikes on Syria by Israel, NATO and US violate UN Charter and international law. So if the Russian Il-20 was shot down by friendly fire responding to an attack by Israel, then the responsibility of the causalities rest with Israel.

a reply to: glend
Uhh ha. And so does Russia not also violate any UN charter or International law by being involved in Syria then? Does the Assad regime not violate International law and commit human rights atrocities? Is ISIS/Daesh not doing anything wrong at all? It both angers and bemuses me that articles like that you quote from a traditionally leftist University and lawyers that are little better than glorified bus chasers cherry picking evidence and quotes from "former senior advisors" etc consistently fail to discuss both sides of the coin. Worse the article preemptively seems to take the default position that Russia and China's argument is legitimate, that "more evidence needs to be gathered" that human rights atrocities are occurring under both the Assad regime and ISIS. Thats their standard tactic in the UN over the last 60-70 years. If there aren't any abuses then why was there a refugee crisis in Europe in the first place? I have no doubt that there are some dodgy things going on perpetrated by the US/UK/France/Israel and allies but the fact remains that this whole situation is completely f***ed up and NOBODY is blame free. And that most definitely starts with the UN above all.

Israel F-16 using a Russian Bomber as protection against Syrian AAA - wtf kind of Hollywood movie script is this from?

Not sure the F-16 is in the best position here, low speed, low altitude, tactical suicide.

They go in fast and high relying on their EW to get in and out, more likely the Israeli EW blinded the SAM from miles away and the Syrians shot at what they thought was the target jamming them.

Rip to the aircrew.

originally posted by: glend
It makes no difference if Syrian or Israel missiles destroyed the Russian plane because all strikes on Syria by Israel, NATO and US violate UN Charter and international law. So if the Russian Il-20 was shot down by friendly fire responding to an attack by Israel, then the responsibility of the causalities rest with Israel.

Israel and Syrian are at war since 1947, they can bomb each other as they please.
NATO is not even involved in Syria. Individual members are, but not the alliance itself.

As for the legality of the attacks of the US and different European countries - depends on who you ask. Of course you'll find experts who argue they are illegal under international law. Just as you find others who argue the opposite.
The article you linked just ignores half of the argument. Read up on responsibility to protect.

Common mistake with regards to international law is only to look at written law like the Geneva Conventions or the UN Charter. But there are actually three sources of international law, treaties, general principles of law and customary international law and written sources generally do not take precedent.
Customary international law can be created by action of individual states and approval of the international community. This is a mechanism we do not know from national legislative process, but in international law, you are dealing with sovereign entities that can literally make up the rules as the go. Within limits of course but looking just at the UN Charter to judge the legality of an Intervention won’t cut it unfortunately.

With Syria the argument essentially boils down to, just because the UN Security Council is deadlocked it doesn’t mean that individual member states cannot intervene in a conflict to stop atrocities.

This is not an new argument, the idea of lawful non UN sanctioned humanitarian Intervention goes back to the Bush era and has been acted upon numerous times since, generally with the approval of the international community.
Like it or not, at this point in can be regarded as customary international law.

a reply to: glend

Just to say that the UK strikes against targets in Syria are legal. Aspects of "international law" were considered. Here's a summary of the arguments... BBC UK Syria

Removed.

a reply to: blackbird9393

Why give the Russians any chance to alert the Syrians? I wouldn't have given them even 60 seconds.

a reply to: CriticalStinker
We have also setup several radar sites in Rojava (former East Syria). They went up in the last month in preparation for a air and land embargo (their words). I have maps and video up if you wish to see.

The aircraft was IL-20M RF-93610.

a reply to: thebozeian

And so does Russia not also violate any UN charter or International law by being involved in Syria

Russia has been invited by Syria to help protect its borders against terrorist! The terrorist being us.

Does the Assad regime not violate International law and commit human rights atrocities?

After the WMD in Iraq fiasco why do you give any credence to anything the Military-Industrial-Media Complex reports? Clearly US doesn't care about human rights atrocities else they would have done something about genocides in Burma or Yemen. So whats behind the smoke and mirrors.

The real issue for US is the emerging influence of China on the world stage. As Zbigniew Brzezinski pointed out, its imperative that US controls the worlds oil to maintain primacy over China. If it fails then China will eventually gain supremacy because it's the new industrial powerhouse of the world.

So it wouldn't surprise me if China is bankrolling Russian defence of Syria. Which might help explain why US has declared a trade war with China. No side really cares about the people in Syria. Everything is about the oil.

So this looks very much like it will blow over without any real consequences but there are some worrying details emerging.

Air Defense Syrian style according to the IAF:

The report was presented at a special meeting held in Moscow, after the head of the defense ministry in Moscow accused Israel of indirectly causing the downing of the surveillance plane

The IDF says that the fact that, to this day, no foreign aircraft has been shot down by Syria is a miracle.

[…]

According to the IDF maps presented to the Russians, there was no room for doubt: the Syrian anti-aircraft attack included dozens of missiles of various sorts, including the advanced Soviet S-200 missile that downed the Israeli fighter plane in the Galilee in February.

The Syrian warplanes fired missiles in all directions: south towards Lebanon, east to Syria, and west towards the coast—where the Russian plane was shot down. According to the IDF report, this multifaceted attack demonstrates the Syrian army's "rampage."

[…]

Senior IAF officers also presented a greater concern to their Russian counterparts. IDF data shows that until February, the Syrian anti-aircraft system, which is the largest and most densely populated in the Middle East, only fired a few missiles in the IAF's attacks.

In February the army faced a turning point. An Israeli F-16 aircraft was shot downand crashed after IAF successfully intercepted an Iranian drone launched towards Israel at night.

The downing of the IAF aircraft by Syria, the first of its kind in the last three decades, stimulated the Syrian's appetite for the antiaircraft system.

In addition to the rapid rearmament of Russia's new missiles and advanced batteries, mere weeks after they were destroyed in the attack on IAF, about half of the aircraft inventory has grown, and with it, Syrian audacity too.

Since then, in each attack, the Syrian army launched dozens of anti-aircraft missiles at the IAF. Syria launched a record number—about 170—of anti-aircraft missiles at IAF planes in May, during the night of "Operation House of Cards."

In Syria's subsequent air force attacks, the country launched large quantities of anti-aircraft missiles.

www.ynetnews.com...

The Russians should really get their # together and put a leash oin the Syrians. Last thing anyone needs is a downed Airliner.

Also, kudos to the IAF, they are doing remarkably well with their Legacy jet in that Kind of environment.