Su-24 shot down near Syrian/Turkish border

[Richard from Rotterdam]

We've all heard the "rumours" that Turkey buys oil from IS.
Now imagine the "peculiar flavour", if it turns out that the Su-24 happened to be involved in bombing IS' oilwells

It is not rumours. Former agencies agents stated these facts on TV, after what happened in Paris...
IS sells 3 millions USD of gas per day to Turkish "companies"!!
And we all use it in our cars, because there is no tracability...

Most of it ends up on the black market in Turkey, Iraq. Also the Syrian government used to buy oil from their arch enemies IS...

[Kuine]

Question.where were the flankers sen to syria to protect the attack aicraft. .

[hammarö]

Was the downed Su-24M attacking ISIS or "free Syrian forces".

The part of Syria (and Turkey) we are talking about is not IS country.

ie the downed Su-24M were attacking "free Syrian forces"???

Russia claimed the downed aircraft were shut down from "ground" ie from free Syrian forces.

the code of the downed Su-24M please!!

[Coati]

Regardless whether they were on our side or not, I feel sorry for the pilots and their families. Especially if they were shot after ejecting. Shooting defenseless pilots while hanging from their chutes is barbarian....

I agree. But German pilots shot chutes during WWII, as well as american ones did...
Syria is definitly not a place to eject ...

In fact, shooting at parachutes, when a crew is saving itself, is regarded a war crime by international law.

[hammarö]

Noone justify the shooting of the pilots, if they are shoot. The shooting is not legal.

But were is still a question of the Su-24M mission.

[FredL]

If I remember well, during the last years Turkey already shot down several syrian aircraft allegedly "violating" Turkish air space.
And still if I remember well, all of them felt on the Syrian side of the border... Today once again : even the pilots, after parachuting, were over Syria...
I understand that a plane shot down may still fly some kilometers before to crash, but isn't it too often here ? And today's video footage showed that this plane went down quite fast after being hit.

Even though this russian jet flew for seconds over turkish territory (a USAF american spokesman on the news today admitted that the position of the borderline in this area is "vague"), is it legitimate to shoot it down after he left ? And anyway, isn't it a totally non proportional use if violence from the Turkish air force side ?

It remembers me of the years 90s when the Turkish air force caused troubles with Greek jets almost weekly, sometimes resulting in dead pilots.

At the end, the only planes currently causing threat in Turkey are the turkish ones : bombing the kurdish side of the country.

All of this sh... makes me also think that it is difficult to know on which side Turkey really stands today.

Let's hope the S-300 won't be the answer.

And to close it, a biter thought fot those airmen and for their relatives...
RIP indeed

[Fishbed_9307]

If I remember well, during the last years Turkey already shot down several syrian aircraft allegedly "violating" Turkish air space.
And still if I remember well, all of them felt on the Syrian side of the border... Today once again : even the pilots, after parachuting, were over Syria...
I understand that a plane shot down may still fly some kilometers before to crash, but isn't it too often here ? And today's video footage showed that this plane went down quite fast after being hit.

Even though this russian jet flew for seconds over turkish territory (a USAF american spokesman on the news today admitted that the position of the borderline in this area is "vague"), is it legitimate to shoot it down after he left ? And anyway, isn't it a totally non proportional use if violence from the Turkish air force side ?

It remembers me of the years 90s when the Turkish air force caused troubles with Greek jets almost weekly, sometimes resulting in dead pilots.

At the end, the only planes currently causing threat in Turkey are the turkish ones : bombing the kurdish side of the country.

All of this sh... makes me also think that it is difficult to know on which side Turkey really stands today.

Let's hope the S-300 won't be the answer.

And to close it, a biter thought fot those airmen and for their relatives...
RIP indeed

The attitude and actions of the Turkish government in this war are at least questionable! Note that 72% of the Turkish population are sunni muslims.

[Coati]

Violating airspace is a legimite reason to intercept military aircraft and shoot them down after warning them. Where the aircraft is crashing does not change that. Remember Russia had been warned many times. So Turkey has every right to act. Besides, Russia had shot down a lot of aircraft during the cold war, because of airspace violation. Operating on the edge of borders is asking for trouble.

[Koen L]

White 19/RF-95092

[Fishbed_9307]

Violating airspace is a legimite reason to intercept military aircraft and shoot them down after warning them. Where the aircraft is crashing does not change that. Remember Russia had been warned many times. So Turkey has every right to act. Besides, Russia had shot down a lot of aircraft during the cold war, because of airspace violation. Operating on the edge of borders is asking for trouble.

You might take into consideration that both are, or should be, fighting the same enemy. My opinion is that this is a very dangerous and irresponsible action.

[ehusmann]

Fighting the same enemy is questionable at best. The Su-24 now came down in an area with many Turkmen. Not sure it that was the target of the Russians, but they are fighting the Assad regime and have been targeted by the Russians. Turkey, probably, supports them, even if not openly. I mean, Ataturk was a Turkmen. So who is fighting whom and who is supporting whom is very difficult to say and probably depends on the position of the sun at any given time....

Erwin

[hammarö]

Russia military now confirm 1 pilot dead, and 1 of the helicopter rescue team dead.

This means that one pilot survived!

[FredL]

Violating airspace is a legimite reason to intercept military aircraft and shoot them down after warning them. Where the aircraft is crashing does not change that. Remember Russia had been warned many times. So Turkey has every right to act. Besides, Russia had shot down a lot of aircraft during the cold war, because of airspace violation. Operating on the edge of borders is asking for trouble.

You know, there are international legal rules nowadays about using of violence while intercepting aircraft. Those have been upgraded and developped after Flight KAL-007 tragedy, in 1983. So Cold War scenarios are no longer valid.
Today, it may be legitimate to intercept an aircraft and "shadow" it until it leaves, but the use of violence, for the country involved, is strictly limited : first, you have to be in so-called "legitime defense" (which means you or those you protect have been either shot at or targeted ; even with a limited knowledge of aviation, one knows that a Su-24 won't be a threat for an F-16 C) and secondly even in this case, the violence you are using has to be proportional to the one you were facing (nobody said that the Russian crew made any use of violence against Turkish citizens, country or army).

Even if this Russian plane entered Turkish air space and even in the case of warnings, it is not a reason good enough to shot it down (especially after he left this air space or is on the way out) as no violence was used against Turkish.
You don' kill people just because they entered during a short time in your "garden".

May I remind you that "violations" of air space occur daily in Europe and elswhere ? They are most of the time unwanted, caused by navigations mistakes, or technical systems disorders.
Following your opinion, would it be acceptable to shoot down each of those planes ? I guess no, because they do not threat anybody right ? Just like yesterday.

It is not a relevant point as the conditions of legitime defense were not fullfilled, but anyway, I have to add that until now, as far as I konw, just the Turkish government said the russian crew has been warned. I won't take this as an evidence ... Asked about this, NATO didn't give any information, just answering that "we have information consistent with the ones provided by Turkey". Quite "light".
It looks like there is an evolution this morning, as both NATO and Turkish government, are extremely "moderate" about this situation. It also gives some impression about the fact that nobody feels comfortable with what happened.

It is maybe the reason why today, at ATC, some reminders about the procedure to strictly follow in the case of A-A intercept have been provided...

Regarding the murder of one crew, I guess it is useless to comment. Just one more disgusting war crime.

[FredL]

Russia military now confirm 1 pilot dead, and 1 of the helicopter rescue team dead.

This means that one pilot survived!

Maybe the first good news about this :

https://www.rt.com/news/323377-russian- ... ved-syria/

[ehusmann]

You don' kill people just because they entered during a short time in your "garden".

In America they do....

And a Belgian plane violating Dutch airspace due to some problem (even if navigational), is a bit different from a Russian Su-24 performing bomb runs violating Turkish airspace due to, my interpretation, pure arrogance on the Russian part. Don't forget Turkey has seen numerous shells landing on Turkish soil already during the conflict, so it isn't exactly a peaceful environment.

Now, if this all is legally right, I really do not know. I don't know the laws and I don't know the current interpretation of it. But comparing it to everyday airspace violations in the rest of Europe is flawed in my opinion.

Erwin