Why Did Turkey Shoot Down a Russian Jet Near the Syria Border?

  • News
  • Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Jet Russian
In summary, Turkish officials said that they shot down a Russian warplane after it violated Turkish airspace. Russia is denying that the plane crossed the Syrian border into Turkish airspace. The pilots are believed to have ejected and a search is underway.
  • #1
Greg Bernhardt
Admin
Insights Author
19,445
10,025
Well this really complicates matters :frown:

Turkey Says It Shot Down Russian Warplane Near Syria Border
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...warplane-crashes-in-syria-near-turkish-border

Turkey said it shot down a Russian warplane near the border with northwestern Syria, marking the first direct clash between the foreign powers embroiled in the civil war and roiling global markets.

Turkey said its planes fired after the pilots ignored repeated warnings about violating its airspace. Russia’s Defense Ministry denied the plane had ever crossed the border from Syria. While acknowledging that one of its jets had crashed in the country, the ministry didn’t immediately blame Turkey, saying the plane appeared to have been downed by fire from the ground. The pilots are believed to have ejected and a search is underway, the ministry said Tuesday on its website.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I wonder how far inside Turkey the wreckage landed? Kind of hard to deny if the plane crashed 20 miles inside the border.
 
  • #3
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Borg said:
I wonder how far inside Turkey the wreckage landed? Kind of hard to deny if the plane crashed 20 miles inside the border.
CNN is reporting that the plane crashed in Syria. This may be a complicated incident to unravel, but in general I like Turkey's cajones.

BBC has more details:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34907983

They say it was hit 1km inside Syria and crashed 4km inside Syria. It did not explode in mid air. Turkey's "radar image" shows a flight path taking a shortcut over a slim finger of Turkish land jutting into Syria.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
nsaspook said:
http://news.yahoo.com/nato-calls-extraordinary-meeting-turkey-downs-russian-jet-115205832.html

http://news.yahoo.com/report-turkey-shoots-down-warplane-over-airspace-intrusion-081734904.html#
From the second article/link
Turkish officials released what they said was the radar image of the path the Russian plane took, showing it flying across a stretch of Turkish territory in Turkey's southern-most tip, in the region of Yayladag, in Hatay province.
Hatay province has an interesting history.

Sovereignty over the province remains disputed with neighbouring Syria, which claims that the province was separated from itself against the stipulations of the French Mandate of Syria in the years following Syria's independence from the Ottoman Empire after World War I. Although the two countries have remained generally peaceful in their dispute over the territory, Syria has never formally renounced its rights to it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatay_Province
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antakya (Antioch)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yayladağı
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Astronuc said:
Hatay province has an interesting history.
Of course nothing can be clear cut ?:)
 
  • #7
  • #8
russ_watters said:
but in general I like Turkey's cajones.
Yes, well, I am not liking what might well happen next, the NATO member Turkey invoking Article 5, obligating the US to come to its aid against Russia?
 
Last edited:
  • #9
Shooting the pilots parachuting is technically a war crime:
Attacks on parachutists, in term of the law of war, is when pilots, aircrews, and/or passengers are attacked while descending by parachutes from disabled aircraftduring times of war. This practice is considered by most militaries around the world to be inhumane, barbaric, and unchivalrous, that it is unnecessary killing (i.e., they would eventually become prisoners of war if parachuted over enemy territory), that it is contrary to fair play, and that military pilots have to be held to a higher standard. Attacking persons parachuting from an aircraft in distress is a war crime under Protocol I in addition to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. However, it is not prohibited under this Protocol to open fire on airborne troops who are descending by parachutes, even if their aircraft is in distress.

...

Article 42 - Occupants of aircraft

1. No person parachuting from an aircraft in distress shall be made the object of attack during his descent.
2. Upon reaching the ground in territory controlled by an adverse Party, a person who has parachuted from an aircraft in distress shall be given an opportunity to surrender before being made the object of attack, unless it is apparent that he is engaging in a hostile act.
3. Airborne troops are not protected by this Article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_parachutists
 
  • #10
Where there's no law there's no crime, there's only war and barbarism. Syrian rebels, ISIS are not parties to the Geneva Convention.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and Silicon Waffle
  • #11
mheslep said:
Where there's no law there's no crime, there's only war and barbarism. Syrian rebels, ISIS are not parties to the Geneva Convention.
Turkey is. Though there are now conflicting reports:
Turkish official: 'Two Russian pilots still alive'
Despite earlier reports that the two pilots are dead, a Turkish official has told Reuters otherwise.

Turkey believes the two pilots from a Russian war plane it shot down close to the Syrian border on Tuesday are still alive and is working to secure their release from Syrian rebels, a Turkish government official told Reuters. “Our units, who received the information that the two pilots were alive, are working to get them from opposition rebels safely,” the official said.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/li...urkish-planes-near-syrian-border-live-updates
 
  • #12
Enigman said:
Turkey is.
Yes of course, and Turks did not shoot up the pilots in parachutes. Syrians did, and may still hold one of them.
 
  • #13
What a mess. I wish that we could just nuke Raqqa and be done with it.
 
  • #14
mheslep said:
Yes of course, and Turks did not shoot up the pilots in parachutes. Syrians did, and may still hold one of them.
Ah, I misunderstood the word 'turkmen' to mean turkish military.
 
  • #15
Borg said:
What a mess. I wish that we could just nuke Raqqa and be done with it.
That wouldn't be the end of of it though, Da'esh or something similar would just reappear somewhere else, this time strengthened by thousands of new recruits.
So then nuke the new HQ?, and then the one after that?, regardless of the indiscriminate nature of using WMD's?
 
  • Like
Likes HossamCFD
  • #16
rootone said:
That wouldn't be the end of of it though, Da'esh or something similar would just reappear somewhere else, this time strengthened by thousands of new recruits.
So then nuke the new HQ?, and then the one after that?, regardless of the indiscriminate nature of using WMD's?
I know that it wouldn't solve anything. I'm just frustrated and wish there was a quick way to reduce the mass of brainwashed followers.
 
  • Like
Likes Silicon Waffle
  • #18
Turkmen in Syria - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34910389

The Turkmen are ethnic Turks who have lived in the region of Syria, Iraq and Iran since the 11th Century.

They are mainly concentrated in the north, in the Turkmen Mountain area in Latakia close to the Turkish border, as well as in Aleppo, Idlib, Homs, Tartus and the Damascus region.

There are no reliable population figures, but they are estimated to number between 1.5 and 3.5 million.

Under the Assad regimes in Syria, the Turkmen were banned from publishing or writing in Turkish. The government did not recognise them or other ethnic groups as minorities, preferring to stress the unity of the Arab nation.
So they represent an opposition to Assad, and that puts them in conflict with Russia. Apparently there is a video showing one of the crew who appears to be dead.
 
  • #19
Russia: No war with Turkey over 'planned provocation'
Russian FM Lavrov says Moscow will reconsider ties with Ankara after the downing of its warplane along the Syria border.
"We have serious doubts about this being an unpremeditated act, it really looks like a planned provocation," Lavrov said at a press conference in Moscow on Wednesday.
Lavrov, who canceled a trip to Istanbul scheduled for Wednesday, said Moscow would seriously reconsider its relations with Ankara over the downed plane. "Our attitude to the Turkish people has not changed. We have questions over the action of Turkey's current leadership," he said. The Russian Sukhoi Su-24 warplane was shot down on Tuesday for allegedly violating Turkish airspace, angering Russia's President Vladimir Putin, who compared the incident to being "stabbed in the back". One of the warplane's two pilots was shot and killed after parachuting from the burning plane, while his crewmate was rescued by Syrian forces and delivered in good condition at a Russian airbase in Latakia province. Speaking to Russian state media on Wednesday, the rescued pilot said that no prior warning was issued by Turkish jets. "There was no warning, not by radio exchange nor visually. There was no contact at all," Konstantin Murakhtin said from the Hemeimeem airbase, adding that his plane was flying over Syrian territory and did not violate Turkish airspace.
 
  • #20
brycenrg said:
Now Russia is sending a missile cruiser. I hope this turns into the Ukraine event that was forgotten
https://www.rt.com/news/323329-russia-suspend-military-turkey/
This is nothing like the events in Ukraine, in this case the Russians are there will the full consent of the existing Syrian govt.
 
  • #21
Borg said:
What a mess. I wish that we could just nuke Raqqa and be done with it.

You did not even bother collecting most primitive, simplest bits of information about the event before you started thinking about solution. This is *exactly* why US foreign politics fails so often.

First, Raqqa is some 120 miles away from the location where downed jet fell.

Second, and more importantly, *this region of Syria is not held by ISIS*! You should be wondering. Russians are claiming that they fight ISIS but their ground attack plane bombs NOT ISIS, gets shot down and angry people it was bombing kill pilot(s). I am not at all sure they were morally wrong doing that.
 
  • #22
nikkkom said:
You did not even bother collecting most primitive, simplest bits of information about the event before you started thinking about solution. This is *exactly* why US foreign politics fails so often.

First, Raqqa is some 120 miles away from the location where downed jet fell.

Second, and more importantly, *this region of Syria is not held by ISIS*! You should be wondering. Russians are claiming that they fight ISIS but their ground attack plane bombs NOT ISIS, gets shot down and angry people it was bombing kill pilot(s). I am not at all sure they were morally wrong doing that.
I am more *familar* with the situation than you know. I was simply griping and my post certainly doesn't have anything to do with foreign policy. Don't take everything so serious.
 
  • #23
  • #24
nikkkom said:
Second, and more importantly, *this region of Syria is not held by ISIS*! You should be wondering. Russians are claiming that they fight ISIS but their ground attack plane bombs NOT ISIS, gets shot down and angry people it was bombing kill pilot(s).
Hypocrisy and double standard are the only correct words to describe this bloody conflict. Turkey says it fight ISIS as well :wink:. In reality though:
1) It buys Da’esh oil through its fellow Turkmen in Syria and Iraq.
2) It let's Da’esh receives money, weapons and medical aides from Da’esh supporters in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and even Turkey.
I am not at all sure they were morally wrong doing that.
The very word “moral” lost its meaning in this conflict. If you think they were not “morally wrong” killing a parachuted pilot, then you shouldn’t think that the Russians were “morally wrong” bombing them when they (the Russians) believe that these are the very same people who drive Da’esh oil tankers to Turkey.
 
  • #26
nsaspook said:
This somehow makes it better that they shot down some random aircraft crossing a finger of land for 17 seconds on the edge of it's border?
I don't believe I conveyed anything about "being better". The article simply indicates that Turkey claims that they didn't know it was a Russian aircraft, so ostensibly implies, they didn't deliberately shoot down a Russian aircraft. That is however a challenge to credibility.

Turkey apparently has an interest in supporting the Turkmen, but not Assad, not the Kurds, not Daesh. Russia has an interest in supporting Assad. It's an ugly mess and lots of folks, including innocent civilians/non-combatants are caught in the middle.

Russian warplanes bomb Turkish-Syrian border town: residents
http://news.yahoo.com/russian-warpl...order-town-residents-151555065--business.html

It would appear that Russian aircraft do not discriminate between civilians and combatants. According to one news program I heard yesterday, Russian airstrikes have killed more civilians than Daesh fighters.

Seems like Syria will be Russia's Vietnam. I would imagine that Russia plans to be successful and restore order under Assad, and probably would have a permanent military presence there, and possibly in Iraq. It certainly would be to there benefit to control the oil in that region.
 
  • Like
Likes nikkkom
  • #27
Astronuc said:
I don't believe I conveyed anything about "being better". The article simply indicates that Turkey claims that they didn't know it was a Russian aircraft, so ostensibly implies, they didn't deliberately shoot down a Russian aircraft. That is however a challenge to credibility.

No, you didn't and it was a statement about how Turkey would prefer to be the clueless idiot now.
 
  • #28
samalkhaiat said:
If you think they were not “morally wrong” killing a parachuted pilot, then you shouldn’t think that the Russians were “morally wrong” bombing them when they (the Russians) believe that these are the very same people who drive Da’esh oil tankers to Turkey.

Even in war, moral measures exist. For example, morally there is a difference in killing a surrendering enemy who was trying to kill you just a minute ago, and raping a civilian just because you have a gun, and she doesn't. Even if both are crimes under international law.

Russians know that ISIS is at least a hundred miles to the north-east from that place. And if ISIS does sell its oil to Turkey, why would it drive this oil to *this* place when they have other roads to the north?
 
  • #29
If the situation didn't appear so serious, I'd almost laugh at the following headline

Erdogan says Syria's Assad, not Turkey, backing ISIL [Aljazeera]
Turkish president says Syrian regime buying oil from ISIL, after Russian claims that Ankara was funding the armed group.
26 Nov 2015 18:39 GMT

What goes through my head;
Erdogan; "It's your fault".
Assad; "No it isn't, Boris says it's your fault".
Erdogan; "Boris is stupid. It's not my fault, it's your fault".

Om; "Children"!
​
:oldcry:
 
  • Like
Likes nsaspook
  • #30
Daesh driving trucks with stolen oil from Syria to sell back to Syria?

Where were all these trucks headed. Maybe we warned the drivers because we suspected they all were from a 'friendly' country.



 
Last edited:
  • #31
nikkkom said:
This is *exactly* why US foreign politics fails so often.
What does a PF post have do with the reasoning behind US policy, and not, say, Russia policy. Or Ukraine's?
 
  • #32
The interview of the survived crewmember



The sound of page flip at 2:24 is priceless.
 
  • #33
The only thing you can be sure of is that everyone is lying about everything.
 
  • #34
Not 'everything'.
There is general consent that the downed plane very briefly did transit a small strip of Turkish airspace.
There is also general consent that the aircraft posed no threat to Turkey and the Turkish reaction was at very least highly abnormal.
Putin's reaction seems very measured which to me indicates him accepting the incursion did happen, so in purely technical terms accepting that Turkey was not acting illegally.
However these minor incursions which could be accidental are usually dealt with by the the intruder being escorted out of the area rather than shooting it down.
 
  • #35
rootone said:
There is also general consent that the aircraft posed no threat to Turkey and the Turkish reaction was at very least highly abnormal.
Nonsense. Where do you get the idea that there is general consensus? That it is abnormal to respond to an armed military aircraft flying uninvited into the airspace of foreign country?
 
  • Like
Likes nikkkom

Similar threads

News Malaysia Airlines flight crashes in Ukraine
    • General Discussion
4
Replies
108
Views
16K
Are West Jet Airlines Flight Attendants the Funniest in the Industry?
    • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
2K
News Searching for the call for Kerry's DD SF-180
    • General Discussion
Replies
20
Views
4K
Do Movies Teach Us Realistic Life Skills?
    • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
8K
The Truth about 911 gutting the disinformation, LETS GET IT ON
    • General Discussion
4
Replies
109
Views
54K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
    • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top