WINO quote:
<There is NO EXCUSE for downing an aircraft 50 mile outside of your territory>
I take it the Iran Air A300 was inside the American 50 mile zone: so
that's ok? And while we are on the subject of destroying airliners, or
lumbering spy planes, don't forget LAA Boeing 727 in the Sinai Desert,
Feb 21 1993.
Wino as you and many others readily admit to being brainwashed ex-mil
guys we would not expect to hear anything else. So your comments are not
taken seriously outside your 50nm zone, so end of story on that one. Bit
like a Democrat attending a Republican convention, he his not going to
covert the opposition to his party's line, as they are equally brainwashed.
If you and Latvia et al wish to bombard the world with your various
jingoistic statements, then I have no problems with that, I am all for
free speech. (And before you bite back I am aware that freedom of
speech is not recognized in a good many countries) But please understand
that a major portion of the world will disagree with what you (US)
think and say. So if you don't like that and are not prepared to switch
off CNN and engage your brain, then tough. The problems will continue
until WW 3 comes along, probably originated by a P3 on a spying mission.
Your nation appears to teach them young. US School children are
regularly shooting each other and their teachers. And the grown-ups say
tut!, tut! But what the American culture is failing to recognize in
these situations is that the school children are only emulating the
adults and their nation's leaders who ride rough shod around the world,
seemingly getting their own way through violence, then wonder why they
are not accepted as apple pie good guys when the worm turns.
LATVIA: As you admit to being one of the low life, you should spend a
bit of your obviously spare time to check back through many of the
threads on this site over the last few years with regard to the high
esteem a journo is held within these hallowed walls.
As you had difficulty telling an IL76 from an An124, I have doubts on
your ability to differentiate between basic aircraft types, never mind
the intricacies of individual Chinese marques.
As to photography, by clever use of telephoto lenses, considerable
distances can be foreshortened thus giving the impression that any
subject, be it a ship, dog, building, aircraft is a lot closer than it
actually is. So be very careful when viewing any photo/video media, as
it ain't always what it appears to be.
Now what would have been said if the Chinese ship under surveillance
had shot down the P3. After all if the USN can shoot down an Airbus, are
the Chinese permitted to do the same?
But accidents happen everywhere regardless of imaginary boundaries. And
there is no doubt that this was a tragic accident. Who was to blame may be
the crux of the matter as far as some people are concerned, but the
answer one way or another is irrelevant. The aircraft was spying. If it
had not have been there, then this accident would never have occurred.
As it was the P3 was spying, therefore it is fair game, be it in so
called international waters (who said that area was international?) or
outer space. And if you do engage in spying missions then you have to
accept the consequences.
SKYDRIFTER - you seem to have your head screwed on right! One or two
screws loose, but basically ok!
<The damage attests to Wei hitting the EP-3 from the
rear, at high speed. >
European TV tells a different story with the P3 running in to the
Chinese aircraft with close-ups of the damaged area clearly revealing
the direction of sustained damage as analyised by skilled accident investigators
(admittedly working from unverified video footage). But as far as many
observers are concerned, who did or did not is an irrelevance to the
wider issue.
Banana wars, now there is a subject worth debating. I bet the P3s have been
microwaving all those bent bananas for years.