Syrian or Russian ?

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 189 total)
  • Syrian or Russian ?
  • Premier Icon cheers_drive
    Subscriber

    Shooting down a military jet on the border of a conflict zone is just about understandable, but shooting the ejected pilots as they parachute down is not on from a Nato member.

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    shooting the ejected pilots as they parachute down is not on from a Nato member.

    It was the FSA people who were shooting at the pilot.

    The same FSA people the Russians have been bombing for weeks.

    I might not think it was great but it’s the only chance they’ve really had to ‘fire back’ since Russia pitched in.

    wrecker
    Member

    I might not think it was great but it’s the only chance they’ve really had to ‘fire back’ since Russia pitched in.

    Are you condoning behaviour in contrary to the geneva convention?
    If so, can we rip it up?

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    I don’t think that the FSA have signed the convention, have they?

    Plus I didn’t condone, I understood the motivation of the people doing it.

    jimster01
    Member

    Turkey aren’t helping their tourist trade –

    atlaz
    Member

    Strangely, under the Geneva conventions, ejected pilots are considered “shipwrecked” and therefore are protected. I guess there’s an open question if an aircrew that is shot down during a mission attacking some forces can really expect the people they were attacking to shrug their shoulders when they’re on a more equal footing (or even disadvantaged dangling under a parachute canopy).

    wrecker
    Member

    Strangely, under the Geneva conventions, ejected pilots are considered “shipwrecked” and therefore are protected.

    Yep. Paratroopers are not afforded the same protection for fairly obvious reasons!
    An ejected Argentinian pilot landed in the middle of the British soldiers he was bombing. As I understand it, he remained unharmed (despite the use of napalm by the Argentinians). If the Uk can do it, then so can everyone else.

    atlaz
    Member

    Oh, and RT has footage of one of the pilots supposedly dead on the ground. Can’t say the Turkmen militia have really gone out of their way to avoid reprisals from the Russians.

    DrJ
    Member

    Turkey aren’t helping their tourist trade –

    Russian tourists have a reputation for being horrible, so maybe there are some dry eyes? Big chance for Greece to take advantage of the folk not going to Egypt or Turkey 🙂

    Premier Icon zippykona
    Subscriber

    My gran made a cuppa for a German pilot who bailed out during The Battle of Britain while waiting to be captured.

    chip
    Member

    That Putin is a cheeky chappie, thinking he can do what he wants. How they got away with the shooting down of and then blocking crash investigaters gaining acces to the passenger jet in Ukraine the whole time using the “shaggy”defence of it wasn’t me, without being brought to book.

    The russian pilots were warned many times, and if you make threats in such situations you have to be prepared to carry them out otherwise be prepared to have the piss taken even more.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    ND wrote:

    An ejected Argentinian pilot landed in the middle of the British soldiers he was bombing. As I understand it, he remained unharmed (despite the use of napalm by the Argentinians). If the Uk can do it, then so can everyone else.

    Strange way to put it, as if the British are uncivilised, and nobody should behave worse than us. Back in the real world, I’d be surprised and upset if the British harmed a downed pilot, but surprised if those in Syria didn’t.

    Ro5ey
    Member

    zippykona … nice anecdote

    chip
    Member

    She did piss in his tea mind you.

    wrecker
    Member

    zippykona … nice anecdote

    +1.

    wrecker
    Member

    I’d be surprised and upset if the British harmed a downed pilot, but surprised if those in Syria didn’t.

    Strange way to look at it, that we should somehow consider ourselves better than everyone else.

    pondo
    Member

    Puts me in mind of a section from Derek Robinson’s fantastic Piece Of Cake, where the pilots are discussing whether or not to shoot enemy pilots after they’ve bailed out, the consensus was that it’s unsporting and there’s no point – “after all, he’s not going to climb back in again, is he?”.

    Premier Icon thisisnotaspoon
    Subscriber

    TBH, I suspect they have as much knowledge of the Geneva convention as we do of the rules behind Mornington Crescent. They’ve been killing members of the FSA for weeks/months, it’s hardly a surprising outcome if the pilots have been killed the moment they come face to face without a plane and 6000m between them.

    Like the Charlie Hebdo attacks, you don’t need to support or condone the act to understand why it happened.

    My gran made a cuppa for a German pilot who bailed out during The Battle of Britain while waiting to be captured.

    TBH, in my view there’s a difference between a war fought by volunteers and a war fought by conscripts. Your gran and the pilot probably both realized this.

    You’ve read chewkw posts before right?

    And every time a little bit of my inner sheeple zombie maggot dies.

    chip
    Member

    Our forces are proffesionals bound by laws and rules so I expect them to do the right thing where as most of the Syrian rebel forces are driven by hate so shooting pilots who have ejected is no real suprise.

    Apparently the polish airmen who flew with the RAF in WW2 would go after the German airman who bailed out after shooting them down, again motivated by hate.

    wrecker
    Member

    Like the Charlie Hebdo attacks, you don’t need to support or condone the act to understand why it happened.

    Would there be the same understanding if our own people behaved like it I wonder. There was recently considerable hand wringing when the UK govt killed a known terrorist.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    ND wrote:

    I’d be surprised and upset if the British harmed a downed pilot, but surprised if those in Syria didn’t.

    Strange way to look at it, that we should somehow consider ourselves better than everyone else.
    [/quote]

    Why is it strange? Would you expect the opposite? Yet my expectations appear to have been confirmed.

    If signing up to and complying with the Geneva Convention makes us better than people who haven’t then yes I do consider us to be better – no other superiority is implied.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Strange way to look at it, that we should somehow consider ourselves better than everyone else.

    Not everyone just them

    You really think its strange for a U person to view themselves and our brave boys amongst the best trained and most moral in a killing zone?

    Would you prefer it and find it more realistic if folk could see no difference between our boys and ISIS troops?

    wrecker
    Member

    Nope. I’m against double standards is all.
    Somehow it’s “understandable” for a certain group of people to act in a way that we would not like to see our own people behave.

    It’s not understandable, it’s deplorable (hence the geneva conv) and no attempt to normalise it should be considered OK.

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    The Alexadra Blackman case shows we do hold our soldiers to account for their actions although there’s a vocal group of people who feel he should never have been tried and was serving his country to the best of his ability under difficult circumstances.

    To understand is not to forgive, as far as these guys shooting at the airman or any other ‘war zone’ actions against a foe is concerned.

    wrecker
    Member

    Good comparison. Considering the manner in which the enemy behaved (i.e; no rules whatsoever), is it right or fair that Sgt Blackman is in prison?
    If it is, when should we expect to see some Taliban in the Hague?

    Premier Icon slackalice
    Subscriber

    It’s a war zone. Dog eat dog, kill or be killed. Hunger, tiredness frustration, emotions running all over the place.

    And yet, from the comfort of our chairs, in our centrally heated homes and or offices that are no where near the war zone, we can pontificate about the rules of engagement, how it needs to be fair, how we are so much better behaved than them, how our morals are superior to anyone else’s.

    And yet we still wage war, commit atrocities and celebrate victories…

    How much more bullshit can be spread about over an Internet forum?

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    If it is, when should we expect to see some Taliban in the Hague?

    The problem that ‘we’ have is that we don’t recognise a lot of these groups as ‘soldiers’ or representing a state/government so we can’t use ‘war crime’/Geneva Convention laws to prosecute them.

    wrecker
    Member

    If we don’t recognise them as soldiers, then the geneva convention doesn’t apply. They can be summarily shot as spies or mercenaries, quite legitimately.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Somehow it’s “understandable” for a certain group of people to act in a way that we would not like to see our own people behave.

    I think when you engage in an asymmetrical war you have to accept that the MO from both sides will be very different.

    I understand why some folk join the army, love the Queen and country and will kill for it as an example. Its understandable

    Do you think i support it now ?Finding something understandable is not condoning it

    Premier Icon wwaswas
    Subscriber

    They can be summarily shot as spies

    How does that work?

    Spies are a bit cloak and dagger, not turning a purloined 4×4 with a 40mm ack-ack gun strapped to the back capturing large amounts of territory within the country of their birth?

    I can understand using ‘civilian’ law but spies have to act for another state during a time of war don’t they?

    wrecker
    Member

    A bit hazy but it’s to do with “lawful combatants”. Prisoner of war status only applies if there are certain conditions. Mercenaries for example do not qualify (which many of the Daesh bods, being foreign could be classified as). Also representing a state is another.
    I seem to remember that this had something to do with the US/UK military types and east germans always wearing uniforms when crossing the border too.

    Premier Icon aracer
    Member

    ND wrote:

    Nope. I’m against double standards is all.

    Well given the Brits demonstrably don’t kill downed pilots and the Syrian militia do, then I’m not sure where the double standard is.

    Somehow it’s “understandable” for a certain group of people to act in a way that we would not like to see our own people behave.

    I didn’t even say it was understandable, I just said I wasn’t surprised. Are you surprised? If so, then you need to wake up. I’m simply being realistic here – nothing to do with British superiority.

    hora
    Member

    There are players in the region who have stoked destability in Syria. I really hope the act of the pilots doesn’t bite Turkey.

    The UK wouldn’t down any Russian incursion or there would be a real long hard think before it would be considered.

    Those US heavy weaponary too. Hmmmm.

    Turkey might feel abit of pain over this I.e have to allow a strike back.

    Quid pro quo.

    wrecker
    Member

    No you didn’t aracer. Am I surprised that these people act like this? Absolutely not!
    My point is that if anyone finds it in any way acceptable or understandable, then they are in no position to judge our own people when/if they behave comparably which is very rare, or even the americans which is somewhat less rare.

    One thing is for sure, those Turkmen are going to get battered for a good while.

    The Turkmen locals will be getting some serious Russian payback, C4 news just showed them using a TOW on a rescue helicopter.

    Junkyard
    Member

    then they are in no position to judge our own people when/if they behave comparably

    WHat?

    Surely we all expect “our troops”* to behave better than ISIS?

    * any civilised professional army to have higher standards than a rag tag bunch of mercenaries [ except the A team though ]

    I tend to agree with your broader point that those of us who will never serve in the arena are probably not the ones on the best position to judge those who do and have.

    jambalaya
    Member

    Madness from Turkey. There will be consequences to hurt them financially and their aspirations in Syria. Russian aircraft over Turkey for a maximum of 17 seconds as per trace shown earlier. It could very well be the missile struck the aircraft when it was back over Syria.

    So my guess ?

    Turkey warned very strongly by NATO behind closed doors not to do this again
    Russia to act financially against Turkey. Already seeing headlines that Russian tour companies are cancelling booked holidays. Russian tourist spending is very important to Turkey
    Russia to up rhetoric that Turkey has been supporting IS by turning blind eye to estimated 50,000 people who’ve crossed the border to join and have been buying IS oil
    Russia to substantially up attacks on Turkmen
    Russia to up support for PKK
    Russia to supply anti aircraft weaponry to Assad to target Turkish aircraft conducting airstrikes in Syria mainly against the PKK

    Chances of agreement between coalition Russia and Iran over Syria and IS look pretty slim now

    jambalaya
    Member

    Pilots / Spies. The key thing here is whether you are in uniform. A pilot in uniform is not a spy. He can be shot if he’s considered a threat, that leaves a lot of room for interpretation. If a pilot is trying to escape or indeed if a rescue is mounted the ground forces can easily take the view he is a threat now or in the future if he makes it back to Syria to attack them again.

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 189 total)

The topic ‘Syrian or Russian ?’ is closed to new replies.