Awol Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Details are unclear but Syria has admitted shooting down a Turkish F-4 Phantom yesterday which it claims was in Syrian airspace over the Med. Predictably the Turks are not best pleased and promising a "decisive" response with one Gov Minister saying it amounts to a declaration of war. Throw in the fact Turkey is a NATO country entitled to draw on alliance support and things could get very interesting for Mr Assad. linky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share Posted June 23, 2012 Details are unclear but Syria has admitted shooting down a Turkish F-4 Phantom yesterday which it claims was in Syrian airspace over the Med. Predictably the Turks are not best pleased and promising a "decisive" response with one Gov Minister saying it amounts to a declaration of war. Throw in the fact Turkey is a NATO country entitled to draw on alliance support and things could get very interesting for Mr Assad. linky If Syria can prove the Turkish jet was in their airspace, it will limit what Turkey will do...on the other hand, if the jet was in international airspace, it's game on. With the Saudis openly supporting the rebels and Turkey possibly on the march, it's not looking good for Assad. Putin has distanced himself now too, so the endgame is approaching, in all likelihood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tegis Posted June 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted June 23, 2012 Phantom?!? Isn't that like driving a Ford Cortina today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Phantom?!? Isn't that like driving a Ford Cortina today? It was recce bird upgraded with all kind of fancy avionics by the Israeli's a few years ago. It seems the package didn't include stealth capability.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Oh dear, Erdoğan is mad. People want war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Just been reading up on this story, and I see Russia have sent shitloads of troops and armour out there. China are on the way too. They are basically telling ourselves, France and the USA not to stick our noses into Syria's business, arent they? Why are they doing that? The best theory I could find is that the governments of Russia (well, the USSR) and China were on the wrong end of revolutions twenty years ago and are natural allies of Assad because of their common history, believing that the authorities of a country should have the power to deal with a revolution free from foreign intervention. Is this the case, or is it more complicated than that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted June 24, 2012 Author Share Posted June 24, 2012 Just been reading up on this story, and I see Russia have sent shitloads of troops and armour out there. China are on the way too. They are basically telling ourselves, France and the USA not to stick our noses into Syria's business, arent they? Why are they doing that? The best theory I could find is that the governments of Russia (well, the USSR) and China were on the wrong end of revolutions twenty years ago and are natural allies of Assad because of their common history, believing that the authorities of a country should have the power to deal with a revolution free from foreign intervention. Is this the case, or is it more complicated than that? I thought Russia were evacuating their nationals and scolding Assad... But if they're actually helping to arm him, it's probably down to exactly what you said. They wouldn't like another toppled strong man, considering the unrest at home in Russia. Rusia and China will want to protect their investments in Syria, and might view a new regime as pro-West, and therefore a threat. Fascinating chess match, this one. With Turkey getting sucked into it, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia too...very dicey situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Just been reading up on this story, and I see Russia have sent shitloads of troops and armour out there. China are on the way too. They are basically telling ourselves, France and the USA not to stick our noses into Syria's business, arent they? Why are they doing that? The best theory I could find is that the governments of Russia (well, the USSR) and China were on the wrong end of revolutions twenty years ago and are natural allies of Assad because of their common history, believing that the authorities of a country should have the power to deal with a revolution free from foreign intervention. Is this the case, or is it more complicated than that? I think that is their main philosophical standpoint but also in practical terms they have a lot of gas/oil/weapons deals with Syria which will go when Assad does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Can't see why china / Russia would back Assad ?? There is no financial gain, would just be to stop the US gaining another foothold in the region ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted June 24, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted June 24, 2012 Just been reading up on this story, and I see Russia have sent shitloads of troops and armour out there. China are on the way too. They are basically telling ourselves, France and the USA not to stick our noses into Syria's business, arent they? Why are they doing that? The best theory I could find is that the governments of Russia (well, the USSR) and China were on the wrong end of revolutions twenty years ago and are natural allies of Assad because of their common history, believing that the authorities of a country should have the power to deal with a revolution free from foreign intervention. Is this the case, or is it more complicated than that? I think that is their main philosophical standpoint but also in practical terms they have a lot of gas/oil/weapons deals with Syria which will go when Assad does. That, amongst other things. China and Russia don't really give a shit about the philosophical angle - if they could guarentee that they would be the first foot in the door with the new chaps in charge when Assad is strung up, with new contracts the new man is eager to sign, Assad would be in the ground by now. Because they care about Syria and Assad being customers and salesmen to them. And Russia in particular cares about Syria being one of the few nations in the region that they have much influence over at all. Russia knows that if the Assad regime falls the West will be all over whoever takes over with offers of new arms deals and eying up the Syrian resources in return for a nice friendly relationship. They would like to maintain some (a?) allies in a region that is rapidly becoming a sphere of US dominance. Anywho, Turkey have invoked Article 4 of the NATO charter, which basically means they've called a meeting of members to decide what action they should take following the Phantom being downed. That would be a meeting you would kill to be a fly on the wall for, it'd be a very, very interesting round table chat. Mostly because I rather suspect the big NATO boys, particularly us and the US, have no desire at all to put any military effort into that situation and prefer the soft approach to the big stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share Posted June 25, 2012 Yep, Turkey will be looking for assurances that US-UK-France are unlikely to give. I think the Turks end up taking this one on the chin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted June 26, 2012 Author Share Posted June 26, 2012 Now the Syrians have fired on the search and rescue plane the Turks sent to find the two pilots that got shot down... Turkey has called for an emergency NATO meeting... Turkey's problem is that none of it's allies really likes or trusts them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted June 26, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted June 26, 2012 Turkey seem to have largely decided that they now see Syria as a threat and will, in effect, return the favour if any aircraft come anywhere near their borders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted July 18, 2012 Author Share Posted July 18, 2012 It's looking pretty grim for Assad now, with rebels inside Damascus today...top officials are being killed or defecting....The Red Cross are calling it "Civil War". The fear now is that Assad will use his chemical weapons...this could get really ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b6bloke Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Can get peoples opinions on this? Something tells me that there is a bit more to this than meets the eye, it just dont feel right! I am not sticking up for Assad but some of the things that have happened recently has made me think "is he really that stupid!"I dont think he is somehow. I mean with the world watching more women and children get executed, seems strange We have seen many missle east dictators brought down recently and I am wondering if this really is an attempt to destablise the country by al-Qaeda? I mean egypt has already got the Muslim Brotherhood in charge. I think Iraq has proved that having a dictator in power may have been easier to control than a country under cival war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 A few seconds ago I thought "Wow, I really should be reading and watching the news more." Then I realised that the Syrian conflict has hardly attracted a word in the Singapore papers at all - no wonder I've been thinking recently that there have been too many slow news days of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 A few seconds ago I thought "Wow, I really should be reading and watching the news more." Then I realised that the Syrian conflict has hardly attracted a word in the Singapore papers at all - no wonder I've been thinking recently that there have been too many slow news days of late. Funny that. The Singapore government would be just as touchy as the Chinese government about showing media coverage of a civilian uprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 A few seconds ago I thought "Wow, I really should be reading and watching the news more." Then I realised that the Syrian conflict has hardly attracted a word in the Singapore papers at all - no wonder I've been thinking recently that there have been too many slow news days of late. Funny that. The Singapore government would be just as touchy as the Chinese government about showing media coverage of a civilian uprising. I don't think they are quite on the same level - the unrest in Western China (Xinjiang) a few years ago garnered a lot of media attention, for example, as well as the recent protests in Malaysia. Fair enough, these examples aren't quite at the level of "uprising," but still I think it's unfair to say that the S'pore government is as touchy as the Chinese one. (that said, I do think that they do act very sensitively to such issues - just less so than China) (Also, I'm not sure whether the China media are reporting on the Middle Eastern conflicts. Don't spend too much time reading news in Chinese these days) Maybe it's about what interests viewers? (nah, thinking about it that's highly unlikely) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 19, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 19, 2012 Singapore's a democracy, isn't it? - democracies tend not to be so paranoid about opposition, as they accept the principle that gov'ts can be voted out - they don't need uprisings to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Singapore's a democracy, isn't it? - democracies tend not to be so paranoid about opposition, as they accept the principle that gov'ts can be voted out - they don't need uprisings to change. It is a democracy in name only, in reality the government acts more like a dictatorship with the same rulers in place since the 50s. Politics of Singapore One day the people will get fed up of having to pay chewing gum fines and rise up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts