Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Plane shot down by Turkish Military
-
16-10-2015 10:44am#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
The_Valeyard wrote: »If its a Russian drone, its sending a clear message to Putin about Turkish borders and Natos annoyance at Russian actions in Syria.
Absolutely it been happening for the last 2 weeks Russian sending migs to track and shadow American drones .it might be time for a No Fly Zone over syria
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Corvus Maximus wrote: »I think it's pretty obvious that the Russians couldn't give two fúcks about NATO or what they think. And if NATO applied the same level of vigor and intense level of sorties, that the Russian Air Force have conducted during the last two weeks. Then they wouldn't be píssing into the wind, with their pin prick air war against ISIS for the past 13 months.
So 8000 + strikes vs 100+ Russian strikes kinda amazing the people are making out that russia is doing more and Better,
Isis strikes in Iraq and syria have done exactly what they were supposed to do and that was contain and deny them more ground ,
0 -
-
Corvus Maximus wrote: »Can you provide me with independently verifiable data to back up those stats. Or are they just pulled from the NATO office of Propaganda, Bullshít & Spin?
Unlike the Russian office of propaganda and bullshít
0 -
-
Corvus Maximus wrote: »In fairness, they're merely amateurs compared to their NATO counterparts. The recent massacre of medics and patients in an Afghan hospital and how quickly it was suppressed was text book. Anyway, somehow I am completely unsurprised to see that you haven't addressed my request.
That wasn't suppressed at all still talking about it ,
I could post links you refute them you in turn link RT to the Putin Press and so on and so on and I refute them.
Which ends up proving noting and attracts the looney tunes brigade .
As Its stands nobody on here has any definitive proof of how effective the Coalition or russia has been against isis
0 -
-
-
-
ben.schlomo wrote: »Suppressed? As in when the U.S put a high ranking military officer in front of the press to give a full briefing and admit their part in it. Maybe suppression has more meanings, off to the dictionary.
No. Suppressed, as in when you look at the gravity of what happened, there really was **** all said about in the media about. If is was the Chinese or the Russians now that would have been a different story. And maybe you should have read the other posters post in their totality, because it would saved their pretty obvious point from going way over your head. Oh and btw, I think you might need to consult that dictionary you mentioned because suppressed can mean - to limit, to reduce ect and that's exactly what pretty much happened after that savage hospital attack.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
TomBtheGoat wrote: »
No. Suppressed, as in when you look at the gravity of what happened, there really was **** all said about in the media about. If is was the Chinese or the Russians now that would have been a different story. And maybe you should have read the other posters post in their totality, because it would saved their pretty obvious point from going way over your head. Oh and btw, I think you might need to consult that dictionary you mentioned because suppressed can mean - to limit, to reduce ect and that's exactly what pretty much happened after that savage hospital attack.
I'm actually not sure that's the case. Given the circumstances, it would have been the same had the Chinese or Russians done the same thing, I suspect. It's not as if the guys pulling the trigger knew there was a hospital there.
MSF provided the location to the US forces. Fantastic, it gets put into the database, so it's protected from planned strikes, or if an artillery barrage is plotted to cover it, the artillery computer system would throw up a warning. But the guys pulling triggers up close are not hooked into those systems, they are reliant on visual identification. I suspect people are suffering from the "Man on the moon" effect: That the US has such a reputation for capability that it can easily do anything, unfortunately, that's not the case. There is no system currently in place which can 'protect' any location at all. In a tactical engagement, it's down to the man on the ground looking at the target and making a judgement call, the US Military should have been better at telling the lads "Guys, just telling us isn't enough. You've got to do more than that"
MSF says they marked the hospital with a 9-foot long MSF flag, and with the MSF logo on the front, like this.
http://gdb.voanews.com/26E9E839-BD1D-471B-A3C9-2B9D15D88E8B_w640_r1_s_cx0_cy7_cw0.jpg
Which, unfortunately, doesn't mean much, they're supposed to put red crosses, crescents, or diamonds on the thing. The AC-130 pilot, or even the guy calling in the airstrike, isn't necessarily going to recognise an organisational flag. Assuming that they can see it from the air and that the wind's blowing.
This is how you're -supposed- to mark a hospital.
http://www.med-dept.com/images/hosp1.gif
http://www.presidio.gov/PublishingImages/Letterman%20History/lettermanhistory1_620x390.jpg
http://www.med-dept.com/images/identification_images/hosp_flag.gif
(Obviously with crescents, not crosses, in Afghanistan, but you get the idea).
If MSF is going to go around saying "Respect for the laws of war is what protects our staff and patients in conflict zones throughout the world,", then it is also incumbent upon them to help the combatants do it by actually using the symbols and methods that the laws of war say protect hospitals.
Hopefully, one of the results of the US military's investigation is to add to the process a bit saying "Thank you for notifying us of your hospital location. We'll enter it into our computer system. For those who are not hooked into the computer system, however, we remind you to clearly mark the hospital with symbols that our men will recognise, and in a manner which makes it easy for them to see it" Heck, I'll be happy to see the US military hand out thermal crosses or crescents as well, so that they'll show up on FLIR and thermal imagers.
Now, if the guys pulling the triggers knew there was a hospital and shot anyway, or if there was a systemic failing within the US military which meant that this was avoidable with no other actions by any other group, then that's one thing. But as someone who's been over there, I'm telling you that I'm looking for crosses and crescents, and I'm not alone. The attack was a tragedy, it's not deliberate flouting of what approxiamtes for civilised behavour in war zones.0
Advertisement