[quote]A Ukrainian military transport aircraft has been shot down in the east, amid fighting with pro-Russian separatist rebels, Ukrainian officials say.
They say the An-26 plane was hit at an altitude of 6,500m (21,325ft).
The plane was targeted with "a more powerful missile" than a shoulder-carried missile, "probably fired" from Russia. The crew survived, reports say.
Russia has made no comment. Separately, Nato reported a Russian troop build-up near the Ukraine border.
A Nato official confirmed to the BBC that the alliance had observed a significant increase of Russian troops, bringing their number to up to 12,000.
Russia denies supporting and armies.[/quote]
[url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28299334]Source[/url]
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/Antonov_An-26_blue_25.jpg[/t]
Here's an example of an An-26 in Ukrainian colors. Not exactly a threat, seeing as it's primarily a cargo plane.
By the way, the An-26 had to be downed by high quality (or at least not MANPADS), AA, an SA-8 Gecko can barely reach it max range, and rebels probably honestly have no reason to take the shot.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;45392884]By the way, the An-26 had to be downed by high quality (or at least not MANPADS), AA, an SA-8 Gecko can barely reach it max range, and rebels probably honestly have no reason to take the shot.[/QUOTE]
Oh boy. More Russians.
God I hope Russia does not invade Ukraine. The last thing we need is a massive conflict in Europe.
Well this was Russia's retaliation for the journalists
[QUOTE]The accusation that Russian forces shot down a Ukrainian transport plane is potentially a game changer. If Russia is indeed targeting Ukrainian airplanes from inside its territory, it is an act of aggression of the highest order.
For the Ukrainians not to respond would raise the suspicion that their charge is false - or demonstrate that the Ukrainian military is completely powerless.
But what can Ukraine do - declare war on Russia? The burden of proof is with the Ukrainian government. However, if they do convincingly show that the Russians shot down the plane, it also demands a response from another corner: Ukraine's Western allies.
If Western officials now do nothing, after promising repercussions for Russian aggression, it will be viewed in Ukraine as worse than weakness. It will be considered betrayal.[/QUOTE]
We all know that war won't happen, and it would be a major mistake for the West to completely ignore this, so I guess there will be more sanctions after all.
This might make things worse, though. Advanced sanctions on Russia would definitely aggravate the Kremlin, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;45392884]By the way, the An-26 had to be downed by high quality (or at least not MANPADS), AA, an SA-8 Gecko can barely reach it max range, and rebels probably honestly have no reason to take the shot.[/QUOTE]
I mean if Russia is denying anything it was most likely something other than the Gecko, im thinking more like SA-15 Gauntlet's/Tor's
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;45393059]God I hope Russia does not invade Ukraine. The last thing we need is a massive conflict in Europe.[/QUOTE]
Nobody is going to risk another World War for Ukraine.
[QUOTE=jonoPorter;45394402]Nobody is going to risk another World War for Ukraine.[/QUOTE]
Well, practically no one thought that a war on the scale of World War I was even possible in the 'enlightened' times of the 20th century, yet it broke out in a relatively minor area due to a relatively minor assassination of a relatively minor person.
After the war finally ended, another conflict on the same scale again seemed impossible - they even called it [I]the[/I] 'Great War', not 'Great War I'. However, World War II was even deadlier and colder than the last one, with entire cities reduced to rubble by powerful new weapons and tactics.
In the same fashion as 1914, people believe that another war will never happen in the 'enlightened' times of the 21st century. Maybe World War III won't happen within our lifetimes, but don't doubt that it will occur sometime in the future. It won't be a nuclear apocalypse, as such weapons are too terrible to so casually wield, but the technologies of today's war machines have never been properly tested and bad blood still exists between nations.
Nationalism also played a role in causing both world wars. Obviously nationalism still exist, but no where near how it was back then. People today don't feel superior to their neighboring countries anymore. They just want to trade with them, bring prosper to their own and their allies respective countries.
Even if a war did break out, whoever was left the victor would face massive economical troubles. The world economy today is so linked together between nations, that if half of them had their economy destroyed, the other half would have theirs destroyed as well.
[QUOTE=DiavelZzZ;45393906]I mean if Russia is denying anything it was most likely something other than the Gecko, im thinking more like SA-15 Gauntlet's/Tor's[/QUOTE]
Possibly even S-300s or S-400 Triumfs.
Back on topic, I think Russia may just shrug off any other sanctions because of trade ties to Asia.
But to possibly give cause to an escalation of conflict is something you've got to be dead-sure that you want to go ahead with it
[QUOTE=Spetsnaz95;45394729]Nationalism also played a role in causing both world wars. Obviously nationalism still exist, but no where near how it was back then. People today don't feel superior to their neighboring countries anymore. They just want to trade with them, bring prosper to their own and their allies respective countries.
Even if a war did break out, whoever was left the victor would face massive economical troubles. The world economy today is so linked together between nations, that if half of them had their economy destroyed, the other half would have theirs destroyed as well.[/QUOTE]
But it is these times that foster nationalism. You can already see most western nations sliding back into a bitter, and sometimes undeserved, hatred for Russia.
Wars make people patriotic. We want enemies; easy targets for scapegoats. Wars often start with nationalism, such as that exhibited by the Eastern Ukrainian Rebels, the Ukrainians, and many of the Russian peoples as well. Then, when the war begins, it instills nationalism and patriotism in the opposition.
And by its end, that nationalism and patriotism is gone, leaving only bitter nihilism.
The truth is that people were saying these exact things before the World Wars. [I]We don't want to harm our neighbors[/I] and [I]nationalism is dead.[/I] World War II especially began like that, and all it took was the nationalism of two countries and faith in two men, both very much emperors.
And all World War III needs to start is some nationalism in a country, and faith in one man.
I am very much aware that nationalism still exist to this day (never said it didn't), and I am aware that many countries as of recent have begun to support nationalist parties in their respective countries. But I am still confident that, for once, we can look beyond our own borders and consider the well being of those around us.
6500m? Even by videos you can understand it's damn lower then that. Also, an-26 used by Ukraine's army to deliver troops soo i doubt it would go as high as article states. also no mention of crew being taken by rebels.
[QUOTE=Cheshire_cat;45394633]Well, practically no one thought that a war on the scale of World War I was even possible in the 'enlightened' times of the 20th century, yet it broke out in a relatively minor area due to a relatively minor assassination of a relatively minor person.[/QUOTE]
I disagree.
There was a LOT of speculation and fear regarding a major war in Europe in the late 1890's and 1900's because of the new Germany, tensions in China with it's neighbors, the Russian/Japanese War, etc. Large empires were already building huge amounts of ordinance in a major arms race. Obviously nobody knew how awful it was going to be, but that 'nobody thought it would happen' I don't believe is true.
WWII however may have been avoided - at least partly Europe, if the Germany economy didn't utterly collapse. THAT was certainly not predictable.
[QUOTE=Cheshire_cat;45394633]
In the same fashion as 1914, people believe that another war will never happen in the 'enlightened' times of the 21st century.[/QUOTE]
There were 3 wars involving European powers from 1910 to 1914. I don't think you are correct.
[QUOTE=Cheshire_cat;45394633]Well, practically no one thought that a war on the scale of World War I was even possible in the 'enlightened' times of the 20th century, yet it broke out in a relatively minor area due to a relatively minor assassination of a relatively minor person.
After the war finally ended, another conflict on the same scale again seemed impossible - they even called it [I]the[/I] 'Great War', not 'Great War I'. However, World War II was even deadlier and colder than the last one, with entire cities reduced to rubble by powerful new weapons and tactics.
In the same fashion as 1914, people believe that another war will never happen in the 'enlightened' times of the 21st century. Maybe World War III won't happen within our lifetimes, but don't doubt that it will occur sometime in the future. It won't be a nuclear apocalypse, as such weapons are too terrible to so casually wield, but the technologies of today's war machines have never been properly tested and bad blood still exists between nations.[/QUOTE]
If you want to play the 'anything is possible' game then yes, a wider war is possible.
I would counter that today's world is vastly different. For one thing, all these potential enemies are economically tied together in various ways, to an extent that has never existed before. For another, many potential enemies now have the means to totally destroy each other with weapons that did not exist back then. Plus, everyone has intelligence assets like satellites that make any and all war preparation obvious before any moves can be made.
So I'm saying I think it'd require a specific choice by all involved to start a wider war, not an accidental start, and no one is going to do that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.