Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Here it comes: Syria

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Here it comes: Syria

Old 12th Apr 2018, 16:34
  #2161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,863
No, as already explained above.

The jury may not even be unanimous as the judge may accept a majority verdict.

The checks and balances are provided by the appeals system, not a mythical 0.01% test.
Just This Once... is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 16:41
  #2162 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,002
The burden on the prosecution is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. That is, to the point that a reasonable person would consider guilt had been proved.

No percentages are involved, the words are plain English and intentionally so.
ORAC is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 18:14
  #2163 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,593
I see the Torygraph has a firm grasp of geography. The Astute submarine s with a 1000 mile range would have to lie off the coast of Syria, Lebanon or Israel. Or West of Crete perhaps?8
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 18:24
  #2164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by Just This Once... View Post
The jury may not even be unanimous as the judge may accept a majority verdict.
In the US, for criminal cases all jury verdicts must be unanimous. If the jury cannot bring a unanimous verdict, it is a "hung jury" and a retrial is required. For civil cases the prosecution must prove guilt "by a preponderance of the evidence," so a much lower standard than criminal cases and the jury verdict does not need to be unanimous.
KenV is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 18:43
  #2165 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,002
Which explains why over 95% of trials in the USA are decided by plea bargaining between the lawyers before a jury is even sworn in.....
ORAC is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 19:00
  #2166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: birmingham
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Thaihawk View Post
If Assad was to launch a strike against Cyprus, it will be one of his last acts on Earth.

Then this conflict could spread and the end game could involve nuclear weapons.
Really ? How's that then, the UK is going to nuke him ? And if Russian personal were killed by any of the forthcoming attacks and if Putin decided to attack the UK as the weak link rather than any US forces ?

If I was Putin and knowing the underlying discord in the UK to any further ' adventures ' in the Middle East I would go on RT tonight and announce that any deaths of his men would be answered by an attack on UK bases in the region. Just watch the sh1t storm then, Social media would go into meltdown, Tory MPs would panic and Corbyn could be PM by next week. Would Trump start a war with Russia by responding to a Russian attack on Akrotiri ?

If May attacks Syria she knows she does not have the backing of Parliament or the British people. She is only going into this to continue the pretence that the UK is the best friend of the US and its Presendent, a man she can't stand and not to be shown up by Trump's new best European friend Macron.

If I was Putin I would look to the example of Stalingrad, don't got for the Germans but go for the Italian and Romanian forces on the flanks.

To my mind May is a bloody idiot for getting into this. I hope British forces don't end up paying the price.
westernhero is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 19:43
  #2167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,171
She is only going into this to continue the pretence that the UK is the best friend of the US
I think you may be on to something. But wasn’t there a big inquiry recently where one of the major criticisms was that Government had allowed maintenance of “access” and “influence” with partners to become the primary factor in its decision to take military action? Dillcott, or something? Anyone?

Sense being spoken by the chair of the Defence Select Committee:

Dr Julian Lewis: "We mustn't get sucked in to supporting monsters on one side, the Syrian regime, or maniacs on the other, the Syrian rebels who are overwhelmingly led by Islamists and jihadi nutcases."
Amen. Lord Dannatt was also quoted the other day as saying that the West would have to drop its “Assad must go” rhetoric. He’s right. Russia, Iran and Assad have so much more at stake in Syria that this was always an absurd position to take, even without considering the consequences of the likely Islamist takeover of such a diverse state. The fact is that changes in the global balance of power and the poor outcomes of recent interventions have significantly reduced the West’s ability to back up its rhetoric on “norms” with meaningful action.

Last edited by Easy Street; 12th Apr 2018 at 20:18.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 20:07
  #2168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: over the rainbow
Age: 70
Posts: 561
Originally Posted by westernhero View Post
If I was Putin and knowing the underlying discord in the UK to any further ' adventures ' in the Middle East I would go on RT tonight and announce that any deaths of his men would be answered by an attack on UK bases in the region. Just watch the sh1t storm then, Social media would go into meltdown, Tory MPs would panic and Corbyn could be PM by next week. Would Trump start a war with Russia by responding to a Russian attack on Akrotiri
Before posting it would be useful to do some basic research.

The overarching principle of NATO is that an attack on one member is an attack on all members.

Highlights
Collective defence means that an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies.
The principle of collective defence is enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty.
NATO invoked Article 5 for the first time in its history after the 9/11 terrorist attacks against the United States.
NATO has taken collective defence measures on several occasions, for instance in response to the situation in Syria and in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine crisis.
NATO has standing forces on active duty that contribute to the Alliance’s collective defence efforts on a permanent basis.
https://www.nato.int/cps/ua/natohq/topics_110496.htm
roving is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 20:32
  #2169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: birmingham
Posts: 48
So if Russian forces get killed by British bombs in a country that is nothing to do with NATO then the US will go nuclear ?? Really ? Let me say this again, there is no underlying UK interest in Syria, all that has happened is politicians playing games in the sandpit, remind me how well that's gone in recent years ?

Assad is the legitimate elected leader of the Syrian Arab Republic, Russian forces are in country by invitation by said legitimate President. UK and US forces are not. You kill Russians when they are there by invite and you are not and that is a very sticky legal position in my book. The Russians would be entitled to defend their forces by military action including attacking a base operated by those who have killed their men. Can you deny that ?

Putin does not even go that far, all he has to do is go on TV and state his intentions if his men get killed and just watch what happens to May. She is an idiot. She thinks that she can play games and there are no possible consequences to the UK, she is wrong.
westernhero is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 20:33
  #2170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Not tonight, darling

The Cabinet meeting outcome announcement does not appear to describe authorisation for a bombing campaign against a fellow sovereign state member of the UN. More of a holding statement in absence of an agreement to go to War.

If the PM cannot persuade her own appointees in her own Cabinet Room, imagine her trepidation at the prospect of persuading her more wayward backbenchers in a minority in the House.

Open house for party goers at Akrotiri and UK bases, for sure. Some Istar and tankering to show moral support, also for sure, as with some Tiffy top cover outside Syria's 12nm territorial zone, but that's just about all for the moment.

Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 22:06
  #2171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,662
There is so much that is 'wrong' about the UK's response to this:

1. May wants to curry favour with Trump to stay on the right side of him for future trade talks.
2. The UK wants to continue to maintain and hold up its perceived position as a saviour of the world. Unfortunatley we carry about as much respect in this new world as another third world country...who exactly is GB these days?
3. We have 4 nuke subs, 2 of which are at sea at any one time....that's IT.
4. Are we really going to contribute to collateral killing of Russian troops and precipitate a possible nuclear war?
5. What is the UK's end game? EVERYTIME we have interfered in another country's war, we have made it WORSE!

Chemical weapons are just another form of WEAPON. What's the difference between chemical weapons and conventional weapons? They are designed to do the same job.

The UK needs to wake up and smell the coffee. We are a second class economic nation and a third class military force. Let's concentrate on what we are good at - erm there is...? ooh, um then there is?
Thomas coupling is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 22:54
  #2172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2018, 23:31
  #2173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 1,594
So - now the ever firm and decisive Trump (sarcasm alert) is backing down.

"...Could be very soon or not so soon at all!"

The message that will send to Assad, and to Putin... is that the west is a paper tiger.
What is it they say - don't bring a gun to a fight unless you intend to use it...
tartare is online now  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 00:26
  #2174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 04:05
  #2175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,970
Modern warfare...

BREAKING: Washington and Moscow are now secretly negotiating about incoming airstrikes against #Syrian military infrastructures. In exchange for #Russia's permission, #US will only carry out large scale cruise missile strike against some of already evacuated bases of Syrian Army

BREAKING: Despite extremely limited combat capability of #RoyalAirForce, #UK has intension to carry-out a political airstrike against #Syria during which Syrian MOD building which is already evacuated in #Damascus can be a target for SCALPs launched from #RAF's Tornado GR.4s.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 05:41
  #2176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 61
Posts: 512
Originally Posted by westernhero View Post
....

Putin does not even go that far, all he has to do is go on TV and state his intentions if his men get killed and just watch what happens to May.....
To avoid over-quoting I am not copying all your post here, but everything you wrote looks perfectly right.

Regarding Putin, in spite of tons of reservations I have about having that man in charge of the country, I have to admit that he does have some patience. Or people in his crowd have it and influence him. IMHO, this is why he does not go on TV: everything was said by the generals and he does not want to escalate further.

In particular: if the missiles/bombs fly towards the spots where the Russian personnel is located, Russia will respond. Not just attempting to intercept the missiles, but also shoot at its carriers. IMHO planes and ships are such carriers, not the base in Cyprus if UK forces are considered.


I think negotiations are now taking place between US and Russia concerning the list of targets. Russia is likely to agree that some Syrian facilities may be destroyed (like a year ago) and they will not use their AD complexes, leaving the issue to the Syrians and their obsolete SAMs. US obviously want a very long list of such targets.


If so, the situation will remain in the same status: very hot, but still not crossing the red button line.
A_Van is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 07:20
  #2177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
99% of the UK population has no idea we have a base in Cyprus and they sure as hell wouldn't go to war over it - and, as I pointed out earlier, you forget the Cypriot Govt are also are a player.

A threat from Russia could/would lead to a request that the UK should leave - or at the every least not use the base. Either would be almost impossible to deflect

and as westernhero said NATO isn't going to go nuclear over say a Russian cruise missile strike on 4 Tornado GR's at the end of the Med...........
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 07:36
  #2178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 200
HH - Cyprus has a patchy history recently of being both pro-Western and pro-Russia, but since the financial crash they've been noticeably less pro-Russia and a lot less vocal on foreign affairs in general. There might be a little posturing for a domestic audience, but I wouldnt expect any significant flak from them, for example over the use of Akrotiri.
andrewn is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 07:37
  #2179 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,002
I can pick out two emerging threads of Russian cyber/diplomatic efforts over Syria at the moment.

The first is to bluster and threaten retribution against the UK if an attack takes place at all. This is perhaps because they think the UK can be peeled away from cooperating with France and the USA. Note that Russian cruise missiles could just as easily hit French bases in Jordan and the Gulf - and indeed France itself, as well as numerous US land and sea assets.

The second is a growing set of anonymous reports of US/Russian negotiations on any attack being against an agreed list of vacated bases and headquarters - Potemkin villages if you will - which would allow Russia to claim a victory after an attack by claiming it was merely a sham.
ORAC is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2018, 07:40
  #2180 (permalink)  
ImageGear
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Having come through the original cold war and witnessed Russia's attempt at expanding it's influence to within 80 miles of Florida, what does the panel think is the Russian end game in this new domino strategy.

For sure, we know that the successful annexation of Crimea and the current incursion will not end the drive to influence further West. So where are the next targets for destabilisation or "liberation"?

What does the "final solution" look like?

IG
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.