999tigger Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I don't think we'll ever get the truth, just two versions of the same incident. I suspect what this really boils down to is who was bombing who rather than who was flying where. Think youll find we will get the truth, its too infamous an incident now. tbh im surpised just how much information came out. If you have seen the news then you will see the new report is out on the US attack on the MSF hospital. Who was flying where is the most imprtnat thing and the basis of the dispute. Who was bombing whom is already known, the SU24s were bombing the Turkmen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The truth in this incident is meaningless now. Each side will believe whatever "evidence" backs up their position, and refuse to trust anything that contradicts it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The truth in this incident is meaningless now. Each side will believe whatever "evidence" backs up their position, and refuse to trust anything that contradicts it. Spot on........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 The truth in this incident is meaningless now. Each side will believe whatever "evidence" backs up their position, and refuse to trust anything that contradicts it. I get what you are saying but I dont think truth is meaningless for those interested in knowing what happened. Iys possible for people outside the 2 countries just wnating to know the facts. Truth does tend to come out over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I get what you are saying but I dont think truth is meaningless for those interested in knowing what happened. Iys possible for people outside the 2 countries just wnating to know the facts. Truth does tend to come out over time. I think that too much is at stake, and both sides are too entrenched for either Turkey or Russia to release any information that contradicts their original position on this incident. NATO will want to back Turkey so I can't see them releasing any information that contradicts Turkey, and any information that supports Turkey will only be seen as Western lies by Russia and their supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 I think that too much is at stake, and both sides are too entrenched for either Turkey or Russia to release any information that contradicts their original position on this incident. It comes out eventually, however many years down the line. I really dont see this event as being that serious. If Russia had shot down an American plane I dont think wed be talking about the US attacking Russia. It will blow over. I was just looking at this ss400 AA system the Russians are deploying. I wonder whether they will target that at all Allied aircraft or just the Turks. Turkey normally requests support so in this case AA batteries for its border. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 Depends you may say it wasnt wise, but it was a definite policy and technically they are justified to take the action they did. Straight forward logical argument. 1. you invade my airspace on previous occasions. 2. I warn you not to do it and make official complaints. 3. I warn you that you will eb shot down if you do it again as im entitled to do. 4. You ignore the warnings and do it again and I shoot you down. Gamston you arent the best at logic. My logic is fine 999trigger , but you lack common sense if you think it was good judgement under the current circumstances by Turkey to shoot down a Russian plane which strayed into their airspace for a mere 17 seconds on a flight path which was not a threat to their country . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 My logic is fine 999trigger , but you lack common sense if you think it was good judgement under the current circumstances by Turkey to shoot down a Russian plane which strayed into their airspace for a mere 17 seconds on a flight path which was not a threat to their country . You stated there is no logical argument. 1. logical argument - a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning; "I can't follow your line of reasoning" Ofc there was a logical argument for why they took the action they did as I had to explain to you. Therefore your statement of NO logical argument is false. For an argument to be logical does not mean it has to be the best or wisest choice, but it has to be based on methodical reasoning. It clearly was. The rest of your point shows you dont understand what a logical argument is, you will just keep repeating 17 seconds etc. There is more than one logical argument. Go and read up on the background to the situation and you will see its a complex issue There are wider motivations for the actions of both Turkey and Russia. As ive already pointed out the fact it was no threat wasnt the point, it was clearly a choice by Erdogan to enforce the absolute sovereignty of Turkeys airspace and warnings had already been given over previous incursions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtkate Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 All the people saying Turkey were wrong, how would you want the UK to act if a Russian bomber ignored warnings we'd given that they were approaching our airspace and actually entered it? Would you want us to ignore it and laugh if it? What about the next time it flies 30 seconds into our airspace? Ignore it? What about the next time when it flies over London? Turkey were completely right here, as I can't see they had much choice. As soon as someone enters your airspace it is an act of aggression. Turkey didn't know where that bomber was headed, if they'd ignored it assuming it was a mistake and then that bomber had bombed Turkish land, what then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted November 26, 2015 Author Share Posted November 26, 2015 All the people saying Turkey were wrong, how would you want the UK to act if a Russian bomber ignored warnings we'd given that they were approaching our airspace and actually entered it? Would you want us to ignore it and laugh if it? What about the next time it flies 30 seconds into our airspace? Ignore it? What about the next time when it flies over London? Turkey were completely right here, as I can't see they had much choice. As soon as someone enters your airspace it is an act of aggression. Turkey didn't know where that bomber was headed, if they'd ignored it assuming it was a mistake and then that bomber had bombed Turkish land, what then? I'd want to know that I have legitimate backing from my alliance (NATO) before pulling the trigger and even then I would always choose a firm complaint, possibly followed by sanctions, at the UN over actually committing something that can be interpreted as an act of war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now