• RAF given green light to shoot down hostile Russian jets in Syria [False rumors, check comments]
    48 replies, posted
[IMG]https://s1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/flCcLmltrFcX29EjTWjVmA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztxPTg1O3c9NjMw/http://media.zenfs.com/en-GB/homerun/video.ibtimes.com/2c7dee27627422bccf91f0522b70a7c0[/IMG] [QUOTE]As relations between the West and Russia steadily deteriorate, Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots have been given the go-ahead to shoot down Russian military jets when flying missions over Syria and Iraq, if they are endangered by them. The development comes with warnings that the UK and Russia are now "one step closer" to being at war. RAF Tornado pilots have been instructed to avoid contact with Russian aircraft while engaged in missions for Operation Shader – the codename for the RAF's anti-Isis work in Iraq and Syria. But their aircraft have been armed with air-to-air missiles and the pilots have been given the green light to defend themselves if they are threatened by Russian pilots. "The first thing a British pilot will do is to try to avoid a situation where an air-to-air attack is likely to occur — you avoid an area if there is Russian activity," an unidentified source from the UK's Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ) told the Sunday Times. "But if a pilot is fired on or believes he is about to be fired on, he can defend himself. We now have a situation where a single pilot, irrespective of nationality, can have a strategic impact on future events."[/QUOTE] [url]https://uk.news.yahoo.com/raf-given-green-light-shoot-133352631.html#gMPowr1[/url]
War were declared.
ooooh boy this is bad
So if Russian planes engage British planes, British planes can defend themselves News: OH THEY SHOOTING EVERYONE
So uh, anyone got any spare room in their fallout shelter?
[QUOTE=Shalaska;48882354]So uh, anyone got any spare room in their fallout shelter?[/QUOTE] For the same reason Putin bet that Britain wouldn't stop him in ukrain, I bet that Russia won't do anything if an incident did happen, it would be really really incredible to spin in Russia that they must go to war with Britain because they attacked them in syria
Cold war never ended guys.
[QUOTE=Shalaska;48882354]So uh, anyone got any spare room in their fallout shelter?[/QUOTE] i'd rather be incinerated than go in a fallout shelter
Why would Russian jets be a danger? Aren't they there to bomb ISIS?
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;48882386]Why would Russian jets be a danger? Aren't they there to bomb ISIS?[/QUOTE] "Bomb ISIS" and half of the western supported rebels. Russia is there because of Syria, not ISIS.
Seems like the only sensible thing to do, the alternative would be "if Russia attacks you fuckin run because they r scary"
Well things are getting interesting.
[b]Even if[/b] this happened, I doubt it'll lead to war. Back in Korea, Soviet Pilots and UN Pilots killed each other, but war never escalated outside of Korea.
[QUOTE=Reagy;48882397]"Bomb ISIS" and half of the western supported rebels. Russia is there because of Syria, not ISIS.[/QUOTE] The US is there because of Syria, not ISIS. Did you really think Russia was the only one playing that game?
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;48882386]Why would Russian jets be a danger? Aren't they there to bomb ISIS?[/QUOTE] Seems precautionary. If actively attempting to engage RAF planes there should be a standing order for that, which as it seems to be, fight back. It's extremely unlikely but it wouldn't surprise me if Russian aircraft fly close or buzz NATO craft anyway as they usually do.
This is giving some of the best pilots in the world the authority to defend themselves before fired upon, if need be. If some little wanker in a MiG-29 lights you up with an attack radar, you don't know whether he's fucking with you or you're about to be the first RAF pilot to die in Syria. So yeah, this is necessary. But as I said, these pilots aren't just going to start blasting Russians out of the sky. This is precautionary, and plenty of SH's around regarding Syria and Russia this week.
"If you're shot at, shoot back" Well no fucking shit, that's standard policy for just about [I]every military on this planet[/I] This is just making it official, article is just fear mongering with a standard policy.
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;48882386]Why would Russian jets be a danger? Aren't they there to bomb ISIS?[/QUOTE] Everyone says they're there to bomb ISIS. The reality is much more complicated. It all started with the Arab Spring in 2010-2011. A bunch of the more despotic Arab countries had revolutions, and many of them went surprisingly peacefully. A lot of dictators realized the only way to shoot their way out would involve killing most of their country, and decided to step down instead. Syria was one of those despotic Arab countries. Bashir al-Assad, the Ba'athist dictator (basically the Mussolini to Saddam Hussein's Hitler), didn't step down. Instead, he started shooting. Up until 2013 or so, the Syrian Civil War was being fought mainly between the Syrian Armed Forces (the "official" government) and the Free Syrian Army (the "rebels"). The "official government" has its pros and cons. On the plus side, they're fairly secular, although the people in power are mainly a certain branch of Shia Islam. And they did a more-or-less acceptable job at keeping the country running. On the down side, they did all the regular dictator things - arresting protestors, rampant cronyism and corruption. And when their power was threatened, they got nasty fast. They regularly bomb civilian centers, and have used chemical weapons (the official UN report doesn't blame either side, but it is a matter of fact that chemical weapons were used, and Syria had a pre-war chemical weapons program, so the conclusion is obvious). They draft anyone and everyone they can - including children. The "official government" has been supplemented by Alawite Shia militias, as well as Syrian Christian militias, and Hezbollah. The opposition has generally been fighting honorably. A lot of them are ex-Army defectors. The largest group is the Free Syrian Army, but there's also the Islamic Front ("secretly" funded by Saudi Arabia), the Syrian National Council (openly funded by Turkey), and a small number of ex al-Quaeda organizations. The Free Syrian Army is the largest group, and they are being supported by the Operation Inherent Resolve forces - the United States, France, Canada, Australia, Britain, etc. The FSA is also a fairly moderate group. They're also secular, and they basically just want democracy. The Islamic Front is a bit religious extremist, but more on the level of "Republican Party" than "Taliban". There's also the Kurdish militias. They're an ethnic group that basically got ignored when all the country lines were drawn, and "Kurdistan" takes up parts of Syria, Iraq, Iran and Turkey. They're a mixed bag, religiously, but they basically get shit on by every country they're in. Saddam gassed them, Turkey shoots them... honestly Iran is the only one to not horribly mistreat them. Anyways, the "Kurdish" militias are actually quite cosmopolitan - they basically just want to not get killed right now, and while they'd like their own country, they're fighting to survive right now. And then there's ISIS. They are basically the closest we have to evil incarnate right now. Religious zealots to the point where they'll literally crucify you for not being Islamic enough. They shoot Christians, Shia, basically anyone who isn't fundamentalist Sunni (specifically, the Salafi subbranch). They're suspected to draw a lot of funding and support from Saudi Arabia (where Salafi is the state religion), but this would be Saudi citizens, not the Saudi government (as far as we can tell, at any rate - I wouldn't be surprised if some parts actually did support ISIS). While currently smaller than the FSA, they've seized a lot more territory by virtue of better equipment (stolen Iraqi tanks and black-market Saudi-bought materiel), and are pretty ruthlessly expanding their army with the money they're making off oil. So those are the internal forces. There's a variety of outside factors in play as well, each with different motivation. The United States and most of its involved allies basically just want to stop the war. They think the FSA rebels are the ones who would form the best government afterward, and so are supporting them. They're also pretty scared of ISIS, and blow them up every chance they get. (If you want selfish reasons, Europe is getting sick of all the Syrian refugees, and America wants a stable Middle East for oil price stability). Russia wants Assad to stay in power because they've been leasing a port from them, which they consider essential to projecting power into the Mediterranean. As we've seen in Crimea, Putin will go to pretty extreme lengths to protect their remaining power-projection capability. Now, nominally Russia is there to fight ISIS, but they've been attacking rebels just as often. Iran is fighting this as a proxy war with Saudi Arabia, for their own complex reasons. They've sided with Assad mostly because the Saudis sided with the Islamic Front. Basically, their enemy is trying to get a stronghold, so they have to put a stop to that. Nominally, they're also anti-ISIS, and quite justifiably so since ISIS has a standing threat to kill basically every Iranian "heretic". Turkey is nominally there to fight ISIS and support the rebels, alongside the US, France, et al. (like the Europeans, they're tired of refugees). However, they've been bombing Kurdish rebels as well, because they fear a Kurdish state on their border might ignite their own brewing Kurdish rebellion. Israel is mostly just sitting back, because they hate basically everyone in Syria. They've fought along the border to keep the war from spilling over, and that's about it. I can only imagine them eating popcorn as their various enemies kill each other.
So, mentioned this to some friends, and I said America (if shit really hits the fan) would back UK, and they said I was wrong, that we (America) would back Russia. Am I wrong? I mean, the UK, you guys have been really good to us, and I'd like to think we'd have the backbone to stand by those who support us.
This could get ugly...
[QUOTE]We now have a situation where a single pilot, irrespective of nationality, can have a strategic impact on future events.[/QUOTE] Now that's scary!
[QUOTE=Daddy-of-war;48882889]So, mentioned this to some friends, and I said America (if shit really hits the fan) would back UK, and they said I was wrong, that we (America) would back Russia. Am I wrong? I mean, the UK, you guys have been really good to us, and I'd like to think we'd have the backbone to stand by those who support us.[/QUOTE] There is absolutely zero reason why we would back Russia. US/UK ties are pretty deep, particularly when it comes to the military. We're both also NATO members, bound by treaty to come to each others' aid should one be attacked. US/Russian relations are very tense right now. We've got the ongoing sanctions for the Ukraine thing, and Putin in turn is trying to sanction us. (It's not working - EU/US is the source of most of Russia's foreign trade, but Russia is a niche market to the US, and is only relevant for oil/gas to Europe). Also, we're already on the UK's team. We're both part of Operation Inherent Resolve. The RAF's contributions so far have been pretty minor - they're basically just transport & spotters, although they have training forces on the ground. But we're already backing each other.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;48882768]Iran is fighting this as a proxy war with Saudi Arabia, for their own complex reasons. They've sided with Assad mostly because the Saudis sided with the Islamic Front. Basically, their enemy is trying to get a stronghold, so they have to put a stop to that. Nominally, they're also anti-ISIS, and quite justifiably so since ISIS has a standing threat to kill basically every Iranian "heretic".[/QUOTE] Assad and his government is Alawite, a branch of Shia Islam which is similar to Iran being Shia. It makes them natural religious allies, despite ethnic differences. Iran was tied to Assad and his government prior to the war, it's not just because Saudi Arabia happens to be backing the Islamic Front. Assad is also an ally of Hezbollah, which is already an ally of Iran. It's a case of "a friend of my friend is my friend" more than an enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Wait, us? If we went to war with Russia, should we be worried at all about our island? I mean, they can get to the channel so...
[quote]As relations between the West and Russia steadily deteriorate, Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots have been given the go-ahead to shoot down Russian military jets when flying missions over Syria and Iraq, if they are endangered by them. The development comes with warnings that the UK and Russia are now "one step closer" to being at war. RAF Tornado pilots have been instructed to avoid contact with Russian aircraft while engaged in missions for Operation Shader – the codename for the RAF's anti-Isis work in Iraq and Syria. But their aircraft have been armed with air-to-air missiles and the pilots have been given the green light to defend themselves if they are threatened by Russian pilots. "The first thing a British pilot will do is to try to avoid a situation where an air-to-air attack is likely to occur — you avoid an area if there is Russian activity," [B]an unidentified source[/B] from the UK's Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ) told the Sunday Times. "But if a pilot is fired on or believes he is about to be fired on, he can defend himself. We now have a situation where a single pilot, irrespective of nationality, can have a strategic impact on future events."[/quote] I swear to a fucking god, we should add a rule where posting something with anonymous source should be pointed out in thread title. Here's a debunk from RT. [quote][url]https://www.rt.com/news/318342-british-fighter-jets-iraq/[/url] [B]UK MoD denies tabloid reports RAF 'ready to shoot down' Russian planes over Iraq[/B] UK media allegations that RAF pilots in Iraq had been authorized to shoot down Russian fighters in case of imminent threat have prompted a response from Moscow. Britain’s military says there is “no truth” in the reports. [url]https://modmedia.blog.gov.uk/2015/10/11/2091/[/url] RAF Tornados The front page of today’s Star on Sunday speculates that RAF Tornados bombing ISIL targets in Iraq are to be armed with air-to-air missiles to protect them from attack and that RAF pilots have been cleared to fire on hostile Russian jets. The Sunday Times features a similar story and quotes a military source who is alleged to have said “up until now there has been no or little air-to-air threat, but the situation has changed and we need to respond accordingly”. An MOD spokesperson said: "There is no truth in this story"[/quote]
yeah, don't post things unless they're confirmed and not given by an "unidentified source" people taking advantage of the cold war paranoia and the recent russian-syria involvement to stir up some shit
[QUOTE=Daddy-of-war;48882889]So, mentioned this to some friends, and I said America (if shit really hits the fan) would back UK, and they said I was wrong, that we (America) would back Russia. Am I wrong? I mean, the UK, you guys have been really good to us, and I'd like to think we'd have the backbone to stand by those who support us.[/QUOTE] no offense but your friends are fucking idiots.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;48883262]There is absolutely zero reason why we would back Russia. US/UK ties are pretty deep, particularly when it comes to the military. We're both also NATO members, bound by treaty to come to each others' aid should one be attacked. US/Russian relations are very tense right now. We've got the ongoing sanctions for the Ukraine thing, and Putin in turn is trying to sanction us. (It's not working - EU/US is the source of most of Russia's foreign trade, but Russia is a niche market to the US, and is only relevant for oil/gas to Europe). Also, we're already on the UK's team. We're both part of Operation Inherent Resolve. The RAF's contributions so far have been pretty minor - they're basically just transport & spotters, although they have training forces on the ground. But we're already backing each other.[/QUOTE] That's not fair. The UK has committed the most forces after the USA and is actively bombing ISIS in Iraq. The current government is trying to push for permission to commence air strikes in Syria as well. Also, we are looking to increase our drone and SF commitment.
What's up with all these unidentified/anonymous sources making wild accusations about Russia all the time? First it's rockets from the Caspian sea crashing before even reaching Syria, Then it's turkey shooting down Mig-29s, and now it's "UK WILL SHOOT DOWN RUSSIAN PLANES JUST BECAUSE" -By Anonymous It's almost having the opposite effect on me where I'm more for Russia by now
[QUOTE=WPlayer;48884836] It's almost having the opposite effect on me where I'm more for Russia by now[/QUOTE] That's because you're not exposed to Russian propaganda as much. I would advise believing no one at all unless there's a video or other kind of evidence. It's pretty strange how the amount of bullshit has only been increasing. I mean, various tabloids earn their money by feeding ignorant people bollocks, but what's with the sudden increase in coverage they're getting?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.