Emergency NATO meeting tomorrow, will war be declared on Syria?

Everyone here is assuming that Syria are the bad guys in this, but remember Turkey violated Syrian airspace, whether it is normal to establish communications before they shot the plane down is by the by, it is an unstated understanding that this happens, not a written rule that Syria is signed up too. Considering the tensions in the region and especially in Syria right now what was Turkey thinking about letting their aircraft fly into Syria's airspace?

And who knows if Syria tried to establish communications or not? Perhaps they did and were ignored, lets face it the NATO alliance is desperate to get into Syria for what ever nefarious reason, who is to say this was not all staged to ensure that could happen. They are never going to get UN approval with Russia and China vetoing any resolution and this perhaps is the only way they could justify it. Personally I just think the stage is being set to give them the next war the are so desperate for.

Another thing to consider is, if Turkey is so strong, then why was it so easy for Syria to shoot this plane down, I guess the air defence systems Russia supplied are far better than the planes America supplied to Turkey, not just because they shot it down but because Turkey claimed to have no idea what happened to their jet and had to be told by Syria what happened (according to the official news reports)

NATO does not have any legal or moral standing on this, if you fly into someone else's airspace you have a duty to identify yourself and why you are there, if you don't then you risk being shot down, it is not the duty of the country whose airspace is being violated to identify the intruder. It would of been better if Syria had just escorted this plane out of their airspace however it is all Turkeys fault.

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
Everyone here is assuming that Syria are the bad guys in this, but remember Turkey violated Syrian airspace, whether it is normal to establish communications before they shot the plane down is by the by, it is an unstated understanding that this happens, not a written rule that Syria is signed up too. Considering the tensions in the region and especially in Syria right now what was Turkey thinking about letting their aircraft fly into Syria's airspace?

Depending on who you believe, they were either just inside Syrian airspace, so such an infraction could be understood and forgiven, or they were a mere 1km from the Syrian coast. It is telling that the wreck is some 10-12km from the coastline so it lens credence that the Turkish story is the more accurate one. I find it hard to believe a "low flying jet" would travel for 10km after being hit before ditching.

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
And who knows if Syria tried to establish communications or not? Perhaps they did and were ignored, lets face it the NATO alliance is desperate to get into Syria for what ever nefarious reason, who is to say this was not all staged to ensure that could happen. They are never going to get UN approval with Russia and China vetoing any resolution and this perhaps is the only way they could justify it. Personally I just think the stage is being set to give them the next war the are so desperate for.

There is always that possibility.....

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
Another thing to consider is, if Turkey is so strong, then why was it so easy for Syria to shoot this plane down, I guess the air defence systems Russia supplied are far better than the planes America supplied to Turkey, not just because they shot it down but because Turkey claimed to have no idea what happened to their jet and had to be told by Syria what happened (according to the official news reports)

It was only an F-4, hardly bleeding edge stuff. And jumping one that doesn't expect to be shot at is an easy kill. If Turkey brought even a 1/4 of their military to bear, Assad would be unemployed by Friday. It is telling that the moment the Syrians knew what they had done, they moved heaven and earth to show they didn't mean it and to locate the crew.

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
NATO does not have any legal or moral standing on this, if you fly into someone else's airspace you have a duty to identify yourself and why you are there, if you don't then you risk being shot down, it is not the duty of the country whose airspace is being violated to identify the intruder. It would of been better if Syria had just escorted this plane out of their airspace however it is all Turkeys fault.

Skipping a mere 1km or so inside an air border is quite common, especially with the border that Turkey shares with Syria as it is a funny shape, especially near where this jet was hit. Syria should have (considering the pressure they are under) played on the side of caution even more. This over-reaction plays straight into their enemies hands.

reply to post by stumason


Atleast you know what your talking about! =)

reply to post by stumason

Depending on who you believe, they were either just inside Syrian airspace, so such an infraction could be understood and forgiven, or they were a mere 1km from the Syrian coast. It is telling that the wreck is some 10-12km from the coastline so it lens credence that the Turkish story is the more accurate one. I find it hard to believe a "low flying jet" would travel for 10km after being hit before ditching.

Whilst true it is unlikely to fly 10 KM after being hit, we don't know how fast the jet was travelling or indeed how far it was able to travel before being hit, they may well have detected the missile lock and run for it but unable to shake the missile, again we are in the realms of supposition neither of us knows yet what really happened. The one thing that does remain clear though is that the jet was inside Syrian airspace.

There is always that possibility.....

It was my first thought when I heard Syria had shot a jet down

It was only an F-4, hardly bleeding edge stuff. And jumping one that doesn't expect to be shot at is an easy kill. If Turkey brought even a 1/4 of their military to bear, Assad would be unemployed by Friday. It is telling that the moment the Syrians knew what they had done, they moved heaven and earth to show they didn't mean it and to locate the crew.

yes it was a Phantom, and not cutting edge, however it is retro fitted with better air defence measures and navigational equipment, it is certainly not the same F4 as used in Vietnam for example.

You post had logic and thought about it, just a shame you had to say " If Turkey brought even a 1/4 of their military to bear, Assad would be unemployed by Friday." While Turkey does have the second largest military in NATO, it is not the best equipped or the best trained and to presume they could just ride straight through Syria in a week is misguided. The US could not topple Saddam in a week, hell a decade later they still haven't defeated the Taliban. Syria is not the weak nation everyone thinks it is, that is why 16 months after the so called Arab spring Assad is still in power and not looking like leaving any time soon

Skipping a mere 1km or so inside an air border is quite common, especially with the border that Turkey shares with Syria as it is a funny shape, especially near where this jet was hit. Syria should have (considering the pressure they are under) played on the side of caution even more. This over-reaction plays straight into their enemies hands.

While I agree they have played into their enemies hands, this does not absolve Turkey from guilt, as much as Syria needed to be cautious so do Turkey, especially as there have already been clashes, shelling across the border, tensions are obviously high. And as I said we have no idea exactly how far teh F-4 had strayed in to Syria or what it was actually doing there, I think it is far to early to consider Syria the guilty party in this

7 countries in 5 years


www.google.com... &aql=&gs_l=hp.12..0j0i5l2j0i5i30l3.4440.22372.0.25957.22.17.0.5.5.0.83.1100.17.17.0...0.0.EnhsgV6ZMTQ

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
You post had logic and thought about it, just a shame you had to say " If Turkey brought even a 1/4 of their military to bear, Assad would be unemployed by Friday." While Turkey does have the second largest military in NATO, it is not the best equipped or the best trained and to presume they could just ride straight through Syria in a week is misguided. The US could not topple Saddam in a week, hell a decade later they still haven't defeated the Taliban. Syria is not the weak nation everyone thinks it is, that is why 16 months after the so called Arab spring Assad is still in power and not looking like leaving any time soon

True It was more of a tongue in cheek remark to highlight Syria's weakness, rather than a factual assessment.

But Assad is being kept in power against a popular uprising by a small minority. The comparison between Iraq and here is not that clear cut, plus Turkey is NATO's favourite to deal with Syria as it will be "muslim" soldiers doing the work, so the evil "infidel crusader" tag won't apply. At best, Syria can conjure up a couple of brigades of loyal soldiers who would fight, which would be ove run by Turkeys massive Army, which is still better equipped and trained than Syria's no matter which way you cut it.

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
Lets pretend they invoke Article Five, would that force Russia to abide by the Article? would they be forced into joining with the NATO response? or could they elect out?

After research, each is required to offer services they desire, so Russia would not be forced to offer military service, though some other aid would be required,

Again, just speculating


i don't believe they will Invoke Article Five, yet

edit on 25-6-2012 by Darth_Prime because: (no reason given)

Some Russia foreign ministry source has already publicly said that Russia's defense treaty with Syria requires two countries to come into consultation regarding any defense related issue. It does not mandate or enforce military involvement of either nation. Hence, Russia can opt to not get involved militarily. That would be a right decision also. As it would be right for US-NATO to not go to war over a single aircraft issue that was violating the Syrian airspace. Source have said said that this voilation was ongoing and finally Syrians decided to act on it.

Unless American political opinion is significantly swayed in favour of intervention, the war will be announced shortly after Obama's assumed re-election, where he can do as he likes since his approval rating will no longer matter.

Given the current circumstances, Syria was fully justified in shooting down that plane.

Lets face it, this thing was coming in low level and was already in Syrian airspace, so it's not like they had time to scramble an intercept or try to contact it BEFORE it entered their airspace. It was a completely deliberate move on the part of Turkey and it sure as hell was no "mistake".

What I don't get though is why the crew (if it was even piloted) would do this knowing the events they would probably be putting in motion. I just don't get that part, as the expectation would be that they would be fired upon, once they presented such a choice target. In other words, the crew would have known that this action would have an extremely low survivability chance.

Amongst all the MSM posturing, has anyone even seen the names of the crew released, or details of the actual plane shot down? Usually, when one goes down, there are plenty of blogs, enthusiasts etc who will post the details of the actual aircraft lost, base - serial number - model etc, but in this instance I can't find one thing. Does make you wonder, knowing that F4's have been converted to radio control before. Not implying anything here, just thinking out loud.

reply to post by Britguy


I see a slightly different narrative, I believe the grounding of the air force was because of a defection and the arrangements for the defection happened during the interdiction missions between Turkish and Syrian aircraft.

I can't see any other reason why a fighter pilot would be confident enough to fly his war plane into Jordan unless he got the green light from a source he trusts, and working with many pilots from many nations they seem to trust each other more than they do their respective countries.

So, my take is that Syria grounded it's planes to ensure the only ones in the air where the ones encouraging it's pilots to defect, thus they made a pretty definite point on that topic.

While I admit that my story probably has holes in you could sail the QEII through, this is the narrative I see from working with pilots who it seems to me to consider themselves a breed apart from everyone else.

Even modern aircraft has its issues. To say someone wasn't flying it would be a highly unlikely possibility. Chances are he staryed off course....could have been a malfunction.

Who's to say until they retrieve the black box.

Planes go down all the time though as in this example you will ask yourself, why did the pilot not even attempt to correct?

Any type of malfunction could have put that fighter over the line..and being an F-4....even if you polish a turd and spray it with perfume...it's still a turd.

The fact that they shot first and asked questions later just raises eyebrows alltogether.

Originally posted by Kastogere
Even modern aircraft has its issues. To say someone wasn't flying it would be a highly unlikely possibility. Chances are he staryed off course....could have been a malfunction.

Who's to say until they retrieve the black box.

I think the event itself and recovery of wreckage will become a moot point after the hostilities start. It's a catalyst event, nothing more, to be used to escalate the war that the western powers and bankers want.

War not looking likely at all. If you google "syria" or "Turkey" then select news, most reports from around the world on this are syaing there will be no type of military response. EU ministers are warning against a military response. Turley has indicated they may cut electricity to Syria (Turkey supplies 10% of Syria's electricity) and im sure there will be other sanctions and a stern warning but a military response doesnt appear to be on the cards.

Originally posted by Britguy
Given the current circumstances, Syria was fully justified in shooting down that plane.

Lets face it, this thing was coming in low level and was already in Syrian airspace, so it's not like they had time to scramble an intercept or try to contact it BEFORE it entered their airspace. It was a completely deliberate move on the part of Turkey and it sure as hell was no "mistake".

What I don't get though is why the crew (if it was even piloted) would do this knowing the events they would probably be putting in motion. I just don't get that part, as the expectation would be that they would be fired upon, once they presented such a choice target. In other words, the crew would have known that this action would have an extremely low survivability chance.

Amongst all the MSM posturing, has anyone even seen the names of the crew released, or details of the actual plane shot down? Usually, when one goes down, there are plenty of blogs, enthusiasts etc who will post the details of the actual aircraft lost, base - serial number - model etc, but in this instance I can't find one thing. Does make you wonder, knowing that F4's have been converted to radio control before. Not implying anything here, just thinking out loud.

You bring up a key word here- 'circumstances.'

To those who say America wouldn't shoot down a foreign warplane in their air space etc, you've got to remember Syria is ALREADY under attack from rebel terrorists trained, funded and armed by the West. Many rebels are launching their attacks from Turkey- so when a Turkish fighter jet enters Syrian airspace, they have every right to blow it out of the sky.

If a Canadian warplane flew into US airspace, then maybe they would try and communicate first, but if an Iranian fighter jet flew into US airspace, it would be shot down without any commuincation.

Syrian intervention will happen before the US elections, because intervention will give Iran the 'provocation' to do something that will lead to war against Iran, it is an agenda and Syria intervention scheduled any time now.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


I just read that a Nobel's Peace Price winner Elie Wiesel wants to attack Syria NOW. He can hardly wait to see more Americans go to war. Why? He claims to have survived the holocaust, why is he so keen on war?

www.washingtonpost.com...

Everyone knows that for every killed soldier dozens of civilians die:
en.wikipedia.org...

He seems to think we Americans drag our feet in this matter. Is he right?

well..... it's tomorrow now.

anyone have any updates??

Originally posted by Outofcontrol
This could get interesting...

Lets see where all these fun and games takes us...

Death and destruction?

2nd.

Well isnt this just great. They fired on a Turkey search and rescue air craft. anyone know anymore on this? Only source I have is fox news www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by Wonderer2012

Originally posted by muse7
Like I have said, Syria did not have to shoot down the Fighter Jet, they took the drastic measure of shooting it down without attempting to establish communications with the Jet or the Turkish Air force.

When Fighter Jets are on a mission they don't fly by themselves.

Well if a foreign WARPLANE flew into American airspace it would be shot down without anty attempt of communication I can assure you.

Does Syria not have a right to defend herself?

Syria had every right to shoot this plane down. It wasn't just a plane, it was a fighter jet entering Syrian airspace and every country with the capability would do the same.

that's not even close to accurate. there's a procedure.

Originally posted by jiwozejy214
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

I just read that a Nobel's Peace Price winner Elie Wiesel wants to attack Syria NOW. He can hardly wait to see more Americans go to war. Why? He claims to have survived the holocaust, why is he so keen on war?

www.washingtonpost.com...

Everyone knows that for every killed soldier dozens of civilians die:
en.wikipedia.org...

He seems to think we Americans drag our feet in this matter. Is he right?

spoken like someone whose never read night.