*breaking* turkish jet down(ed) near syria

[Sasha]

According to dutch news a Turkish military plane has been shot down by syrian air defence, the two pilots have been rescued, if (like turkey claims) the incident happened outside syrian airspace NATO will be forced by its own treaties to consider this an act of war...
Whether provoked, falseflag or a stupidity by a nervous Syrian comander this might very well be the excuse turkey and the rest of nato has been waiting on to get involved military...

[piet11111]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/22/us-turkey-syria-plane-idUSBRE85L0OX20120622?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=286409


(Reuters) - Turkey said on Friday it had lost contact with a military aircraft while it was over the sea off the southeastern province of Hatay, which borders Syria.
CNN Turk television said the aircraft had crashed in Syria. There was no immediate official confirmation of that report.
In a statement, Turkey's military said a search and rescue operation was underway after it lost radar and radio contact with the plane after it took off from Erhac Airport in the eastern province of Malatya.

[ВАЛТЕР]

They're feeling Syria out. Getting an idea of how they will respond to aggression. It is kind of like boxing, the opening rounds are more or less to get a feel for how your opponent reacts, not necessarily begin any serious offensive.

Then again, it could be a purposeful provocation. Since now (according to the NATO treaty) Syria can be attacked by NATO nations. After all, Syria "started it". :rolleyes:

[Rusty Shackleford]

They're feeling Syria out. Getting an idea of how they will respond to aggression.




and as we can see, they dont take kindly to it. :lol:

[Rocky Rococo]

As more info comes out, it is apparent that the plane shot down was an F-4, which was one of the first-line combat jets of the USAF in the Vietnam era. In today's NATO arsenal, these old "Phantom" jets are mostly retrofitted for electronic intelligence and recon functions. It's highly likely that the mission was to fly at Syria at a high speed, which is done to cause the target nation to turn on all its radars, ECM, ECCM, and air defense communications networks. (It's called "lighting up the christmas tree" in the US military-intelligence system.) The F-4 would then electronically collect and store information on signal types and emitter locations. When analyzed by elint specialists, this data can then be used to draw up a complete model of the Syrian air defense system, which will be the first set of targets in any NATO assault.

The shot down Turkish F-4 was apparently flying at very low altitude, the following YouTube shows an F-4's low altitude performance capabilities:

U2_DXYieL_o

[seventeethdecember2016]

An F-4... In many respects, Syria was doing Turkey a great favor. Now Turkey has the capacity to buy a more quality fighter.

[Rocky Rococo]

Turkey has plenty of F-16s. What I bet they don't have a lot of is airborne sigint collection platforms. They'll end up having to buy another RF-4.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Turkey has plenty of F-16s. What I bet they don't have a lot of is airborne sigint collection platforms. They'll end up having to buy another RF-4.
if the goal was to actually get that map of syrian air defenses when why wouldnt NATO use something a bit more advanced?


or is this just turkey's deal right now?

[piet11111]

if the goal was to actually get that map of syrian air defenses when why wouldnt NATO use something a bit more advanced?


or is this just turkey's deal right now?

Compare the F-4 to a pickup truck and the F-16 to a sportscar sure the F-16 would be better for something that requires speed and maneuverability but if you require a jet that you can attach a fuck-ton of sensor equipment to then the F-4 is better suited for that job.

[Eagle_Syr]

Why was the jet in Syrian air space?

I say, they got what was coming

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Didn't they just do this to get a reason to attack Syria?

[Lynx]

The Syrian army is no match for NATO. Adieu Assad

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

The Syrian army is no match for NATO. Adieu Assad

To be fair, I don't think any army is a match for NATO really.
At least not that I can think of.

[Sasha]

China would probably got a fighting chance...

[Prometeo liberado]

Reminds me of The Gulf of Tonkin incident. Nothing new here. As for Syria being no match for NATO I would only suggest you look at what resistance the Iraqi people were up against with the superior American led coalition and how they bogged the invaders down. Even the Afghans have kept the Coalition forces bleeding for some time now.

[piet11111]

China would probably got a fighting chance...

Against the whole of NATO ?

I would expect Russia to do better they have advanced technology that would cause real damage to the overconfident NATO forces even in the sorry state they are since the collapse of the USSR.

[Eagle_Syr]

Superior armies have been defeated by inferior armies when those men had a cause, had beliefs, had principles.

[piet11111]

Superior armies have been defeated by inferior armies when those men had a cause, had beliefs, had principles.

And now with nuclear weapons its never been easier or more suicidal.

But on the topic of Syria its surprising to me that so far there have been no calls for article 5 of the nato treaty by Turkey.
They made a call for it over the supposed cross border attack but now that they have a much stronger case they are completely silent.

I doubt this can turn out to be a good thing or maybe they are still probing their NATO allies if they would support that.

[cynicles]

Superior armies have been defeated by inferior armies when those men had a cause, had beliefs, had principles.
Like when Hizbullah sent the 'all powerful' IDF soldiers screaming like little children out of south Lebanon.

[Rafiq]

Superior armies have been defeated by inferior armies when those men had a cause, had beliefs, had principles.

What a load of shit. It's about strategy and tactics.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Eagle_Syr]

What a load of shit. It's about strategy and tactics.



That's how you win, but you need to believe in the cause in order to put your life on the line when everything is against you.

[Salyut]

if the goal was to actually get that map of syrian air defenses when why wouldnt NATO use something a bit more advanced?


or is this just turkey's deal right now?

Basically you send a plane to probe the border region. The other side gets antsy and lights up the air defense network. Then you can map out where the air defense radars are. You don't need anything fancy for this kind of work, and it'd suck to lose expensive equipment as a result. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escuadr%C3%B3n_F%C3%A9nix)

I'd expect to see the Turks hit the Syrian air defense network in retaliation. Basically a repeat of what went down in 1983 between the Americans and Syrians. (http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_278.shtml)

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Modern western armies have a tendency to rely too heavily on technology which can cause them to neglect tactics. The arms manufacturers have an obvious interest in positioning their products as both useful and reliable and the military constantly falls for this pitch.

Fast forward to the next conflict where these products are put to use and it turns out they don't work in harsh conditions or maybe not at all and the military is left with a bunch of expensive paper weights and combat units unable to operate effectively without those toys doing their jobs for them.

Of course this just paves the way for the next product from the same manufacturers that will be replace the old shit item with the brand new item guaranteed to be useful and reliable in the field. The MIC works in peculiar ways.

[Sasha]

maybe iran ,russia would hit turkey in retaliation if the turks attacked.

And why would they do that? They have been ready to sink assad for weeks, last thing they are trying to negotiate out is a Yemen style exit, if russia/China would hit turkey they would have full war with NATO, thats bad for buisness, and if there is one thing russia and china have shown throughout the whole arab uprising its that the only thing they care about is buisness

[piet11111]

And why would they do that? They have been ready to sink assad for weeks, last thing they are trying to negotiate out is a Yemen style exit, if russia/China would hit turkey they would have full war with NATO, thats bad for buisness, and if there is one thing russia and china have shown throughout the whole arab uprising its that the only thing they care about is buisness

Russia has been hinting towards being open for a "transition" that would leave Russian interests intact (most of all their naval base)
And back with the Houla massacre when it seemed that the Syrian government was responsible they thought they could no longer rely on Assad but that has since then proven to be false.
However things have changed and it seems that Assad could still be salvaged or at least have him step down but the rest of his regime still in place to go back to business as usual instead of the americans running the show.

Iran has no choice but to support the only regime friendly to them because they know damn well that Syria is the only obstacle to an attack on them.

[NoPasaran1936]

Against the whole of NATO ?

I would expect Russia to do better they have advanced technology that would cause real damage to the overconfident NATO forces even in the sorry state they are since the collapse of the USSR.

There's no strategy in numbers, with tactics. A small military could defeat a large one, especially as NATO consists of nations with different training standards. Given that if we all joined the U.S military, we'd all be infantry soldiers in about 6 weeks...

[Sasha]

@ freepalestine; they where more than happy to let assad stay, too much a sectarian hornets nest, even although the russians have the trade sown up it would still in the end probably be very bad for buisness as Iran very well might get involved and despite all the sabrerateling neither the US nor Israeli gov can afford war with Iran atm. Problem for the nato is you can only claim to "protect human rights everywhere" for so long before the at home public outrage over some dictator you don't really want to get rid off forces you through his way to obvious war crimes to put your money where your mouth is.

[piet11111]

There's no strategy in numbers, with tactics. A small military could defeat a large one, especially as NATO consists of nations with different training standards. Given that if we all joined the U.S military, we'd all be infantry soldiers in about 6 weeks...

The last time that applied was Israel against Egypt in the six day war and that had more to do with Egypt making gigantic errors then Israel being really skilled (seriously withdraw in 24 hours WTF ?!?!? no wonder they got destroyed if they are all in a mad rush back to Egypt)

With proper tactics you could do a lot of damage but it won't save your skin against a vastly superior enemy as such Syria wont fight of the whole of NATO.



They where more than happy to let assad stay, to much a sectarian hornets nest, even although the russians have the trade sown up it would probably bad for buisness as Iran very well might get involved and despite all the sabrerateling neither the US nor Israeli gov can afford war with Iran atm. Problem for thr nato is you can only claim to "protect human rights everywhere" before the at home public outrage some dictator you don't really want to get rid off forces you trough way to obvious war crimes to put your money where your mouth is.

What ?
Drunken posting in progress here ? (same on my part right now)

[Lynx]

An air campaign would be sufficient to degrade the Syrian military. The overthrow of Assad and the massacre of his supporters would be accomplished from within, through ethnic cleansing.

[Sasha]

@ piet;.cleaned it up a bit...

[campesino]

An air campaign would be sufficient to degrade the Syrian military. The overthrow of Assad and the massacre of his supporters would be accomplished from within, through ethnic cleansing.

I think the syrian air defences can do their job, the syrian regime isn't as unpopular at home as it is with the exiled.

[Lynx]

I think the syrian air defences can do their job, the syrian regime isn't as unpopular at home as it is with the exiled.
Their first task is to remove the air defenses, as they did in Iraq and Libya. Then, true to form, they will use control of the skies to reduce Syrian ground infantry to scrap metal.

Occupying the country is what they wish to avoid.

[Rafiq]

That's how you win, but you need to believe in the cause in order to put your life on the line when everything is against you.

That's called morale and no, "Beliefs" and "Ideas" don't win wars, successful tactics and dynamic strategy does, in the case of guerrilla warfare. Moreover, material conditions have a huge wager in it, and geography does as well.

[Blake's Baby]

That's not what ES was saying though Rafiq. He was saying that you need belief in your cause, he didn't say you only need belief in your cause.

Superior tactics and good quality equipment (or any other material factor) will not win a war if your army surrenders or deserts because it has no hope or because the other side has successfully persuaded it to join the other side.

[crazyirish93]

Just to add a bit of new relevant information turkey has invoked article 4 of the NATO charter which allows consultations if a members security is threatened also the Turkish say the F4 was shot down in international waters 24km from the Syrian coast Syrian airspace ends at 22.2 km from their coast,personally i believe the F4 was on a recon mission trying to find Syrian radar installations strayed way too close got fired upon tried turn tail got hit and ended up marginally outside Syrian airspace.

[citizen of industry]

There's no strategy in numbers, with tactics. A small military could defeat a large one, especially as NATO consists of nations with different training standards. Given that if we all joined the U.S military, we'd all be infantry soldiers in about 6 weeks...

Don't underestimate your opponent. 8 weeks can seem a lot longer when all you are doing is training and have no contact with the outside world. That might make you qualified on paper but the 3 months training after that is where you learn the basics of the "trade." A bit of leave in between, then after what is now 6 months, not 6 weeks of constant training, you get sent to your division and are are worthless newbie for a year or so until more worthless newbies replace you. So I'd put US "basic" training at 18 months, not 1.5 months.

[citizen of industry]

Modern western armies have a tendency to rely too heavily on technology which can cause them to neglect tactics. The arms manufacturers have an obvious interest in positioning their products as both useful and reliable and the military constantly falls for this pitch.

Fast forward to the next conflict where these products are put to use and it turns out they don't work in harsh conditions or maybe not at all and the military is left with a bunch of expensive paper weights and combat units unable to operate effectively without those toys doing their jobs for them.

Of course this just paves the way for the next product from the same manufacturers that will be replace the old shit item with the brand new item guaranteed to be useful and reliable in the field. The MIC works in peculiar ways.

US arms were inferior to Soviet counterparts, but their planes and ships were far superior. I think that's a given when looking at continental vs. maritime powers. Looking at Iraq casualties there are over a million dead Iraqis and around 3,000 dead US troops.
So obviously it's "enough." I wouldn't make a comparison between the arms they give their cannon fodder and the naval and air budget that dwarfs many nations as a whole.

[~Spectre]

China would probably got a fighting chance...

No. None whatsoever actually.

[~Spectre]

Like when Hizbullah sent the 'all powerful' IDF soldiers screaming like little children out of south Lebanon.

The IDF isn't all powerful. Israel is a small state with a tiny economy, who fights as long as their American patrons are willing to humor them. Israel as a whole, is considered a weak division of the American Godfather's clique.

For comparison, see the Battle of Fallujah, which was the one instance in Iraq were the U.S. military ratcheted up its strength to Vietnam levels of aggression. They inflicted more damage than Israel did in their entire 2006 campaign, and they left it with radiation poisoning issues comparable to Hiroshima.

The world situation today is quite unparalleled in how a single state has so much killing power.

[~Spectre]

As for this, it looks like a provocation by NATO. They used to do this to Saddam Hussein all the time, only towards the end he realized what was up and instituted tight controls to prevent Iraqi air defenses from firing.

As for article 5. I'm not sure it applies. Article 5 specifies an attack in Europe or North America. (I.E., the U.S. can't say, fly into Iranian airspace, get shot at, and then claim article 5)

[Salyut]

Turkey says Syria fired on one of its planes that was taking part in a rescue operation for a warplane shot down by Syrian forces last Friday. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18586645)


Yeah. This isn't going to end well for the Syrians...

[Sasha]

Turkey invoked article 5 of the NATO charter, no guarantee that this will mean further armed international conflict but it certainly creates the conditions for it.

[~Spectre]

Turkey invoked article 5 of the NATO charter, no guarantee that this will mean further armed international conflict but it certainly creates the conditions for it.

Link?

[TheRedAnarchist23]

Why is this in politics, there really shoud be a news forum here on revleft.

[pastradamus]

This reeks of the 60s & 70s. What an absolute set-up this is. What would an F-4 Phantom be doing flying at low altitude? Better yet what would an F-4 Phantom be doing flying into Syria? Its not like the crew didn't know where it was going or anything. If I drive into Syria my GPS lets me know where I am in my dodgy old Toyota Corolla. Are they expecting us to think that with the technology they have that this wasn't possible?

Also, there is the obvious as hell example of "why did this happen now of all times?" or better yet "why hasn't this ever happened before?"

Absolute Vietnam era bullshit is what I say. Dont get me wrong, Assad must go and the "free" Syrian Army are a complete joke, but this is not our ideal people and so we cannot support one hand or the other.

Set up plain and simple.

[Salyut]

Looks like it might have been a case of mistaken identity. (http://theaviationist.com/2012/06/28/turkish-phantom-shot-down-because-syrian-soldiers-may-have-confused-it-for-an-israeli-plane-syrian-information-minister-says/)