Turkish F4 "Vanishes"
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The F4 in question is now reported as a RECON F4, unarmed.
The latest article I've seen says the plane was shot down for violating syrian airspace. question of course on what constitutes national airspace of course.
pilots missing, both sides looking for pilots...turkey says it will do something.
The latest article I've seen says the plane was shot down for violating syrian airspace. question of course on what constitutes national airspace of course.
pilots missing, both sides looking for pilots...turkey says it will do something.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by jcjeant; 23rd Jun 2012 at 20:57.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: BKK-ABZ
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wheels within wheels..
Iran is the new 'bad guy' - Syria is in the way. Turkey is dependant on US and NATO military aid. Good guys need to know how switched on is Syrian AD capability. Put feelers out. Feeler is shot down. Hilary bumps gums. Behind scenes, Turkey encouraged to engage in 'Kick off'. Russkis watching eyes wide open..........
Tonkin non incident comes to mind.
Tonkin non incident comes to mind.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That Russian website that jcjeant linked to is interesting in translation
Google Translate
Basically they're suggesting the MIG-21 that went to Jordan was hijacked by a mole with a view to obtaining the IFF codes - and that the lost Turkish flight was a trial of fake IFF codes to test the Syrian defence......
Murkier and murkier - and I don't know if it indicates paranioa on the part of the Russians, or an attempt at spin, but either way, a disturbing line of argument
Google Translate
Basically they're suggesting the MIG-21 that went to Jordan was hijacked by a mole with a view to obtaining the IFF codes - and that the lost Turkish flight was a trial of fake IFF codes to test the Syrian defence......
Murkier and murkier - and I don't know if it indicates paranioa on the part of the Russians, or an attempt at spin, but either way, a disturbing line of argument
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aselsan-modified F-4E Phantom
When are they retiring the F-4E Aselsan Phantoms? What is the extended life cycle of the airframe?
Last edited by Ada Quonsett; 24th Jun 2012 at 10:12.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South of England
Age: 74
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Turkey
"Turkey is dependant on US and NATO military aid." Well actually Turkey is part of NATO; as are the UK, USA and a few others. If a country is a member of a military treaty organization and has contributed to that organization for many years they have a right to expect military support when they need it.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Syria shot down Turkish jet in international airspace, claims foreign minister
Syria shot down a Turkish fighter jet while it was flying in international airspace some 15 minutes after momentarily straying into Syria's territory, Turkey's foreign minister has claimed.
Ahmet Davutoglu said that there was no warning from Syria before it shot down the plane, which did not have arms and was flying on a training mission and undertaking a radar system test.
"According to our conclusions, our plane was shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles from Syria," Mr Davutoglu told TRT television. "The plane did not show any sign of hostility toward Syria and was shot down about 15 minutes after having momentarily violated Syrian airspace. The Syrians knew full well that it was a Turkish military plane and the nature of its mission."................
Syria shot down a Turkish fighter jet while it was flying in international airspace some 15 minutes after momentarily straying into Syria's territory, Turkey's foreign minister has claimed.
Ahmet Davutoglu said that there was no warning from Syria before it shot down the plane, which did not have arms and was flying on a training mission and undertaking a radar system test.
"According to our conclusions, our plane was shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles from Syria," Mr Davutoglu told TRT television. "The plane did not show any sign of hostility toward Syria and was shot down about 15 minutes after having momentarily violated Syrian airspace. The Syrians knew full well that it was a Turkish military plane and the nature of its mission."................
Last edited by ORAC; 24th Jun 2012 at 12:57.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Seem's the Syrian intelligence services are very good (like their air defense)
The Syrians knew full well that it was a Turkish military plane and the nature of its mission."
Seem's the Syrian intelligence services are very good (like their air defense)
Last edited by jcjeant; 24th Jun 2012 at 13:06.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The point being that, in shooting it down in international airspace, Syria conducted an act of war to which Turkey is entitled to respond and to ask for help from the rest of NATO.
The total destruction of all Syrian SAW and AD airfields might be an apposite response....
The total destruction of all Syrian SAW and AD airfields might be an apposite response....
Last edited by ORAC; 24th Jun 2012 at 13:33.
As a member of Nato, Turkey could potentially invoke Chapter V of the alliance's treaty which states that an attack on one state would be viewed as an attack on all signatories of the alliance.
But because the clause dictates that such an attack must be carried out on European or American soil, Mr Erdogan is unlikely to make such demands of his Western allies.
But because the clause dictates that such an attack must be carried out on European or American soil, Mr Erdogan is unlikely to make such demands of his Western allies.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
But because the clause dictates that such an attack must be carried out on European or American soil,
Wanna argue?
The North Atlantic Treaty
Article 5
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .
Article 6 (1)
For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France (2), on the territory of or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
Last edited by ORAC; 24th Jun 2012 at 14:14.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
I'll point out that, in attacking a NATO nation Syria has liberated them from having to gain UN Security Council approval to respond.
NATO Article 5 allows action under the right of individual and collective self-defense guaranteed by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The principle was agreed otherwise, during the Cold War, the USSR and China could have vetoed any response to an attack on a NATO member.
Syria may just have totally opened the door to a whole world of hurt.
NATO Article 5 allows action under the right of individual and collective self-defense guaranteed by Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The principle was agreed otherwise, during the Cold War, the USSR and China could have vetoed any response to an attack on a NATO member.
Syria may just have totally opened the door to a whole world of hurt.
CargoOne,
To attack what? To achieve what? For what purpose?
To attack what? To achieve what? For what purpose?
I'll point out that, in attacking a NATO nation Syria has liberated them from having to gain UN Security Council approval to respond.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The Turks will be hard-pressed to argue that they were attacked, especially if it does transpire that their F4 did violate Syrian airspace. Sounds to me like they are fishing for some backing/sympathy.
Last edited by ORAC; 24th Jun 2012 at 17:09.