-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Turkey really shoots down a Mig today
- Thread starter longbow
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Do you really think the Russians would have hesitated to shoot Syrian rebels in a similar or equal position? The Russian army and the so-called rules of war have never really been close bedfellows.
Disclaimer: I have not read the 7 pages of this thread.
This is why we have no business supporting any of the savages here. They will drag us into a hell of their own making. Isolation until they gain some semblance of sanity is the only good option. Staying 'engaged' only makes us vulnerable. Now, to the point of global oblivion. But it is the path our misadministration would take us down...and still has a year to do so.
This is why we have no business supporting any of the savages here. They will drag us into a hell of their own making. Isolation until they gain some semblance of sanity is the only good option. Staying 'engaged' only makes us vulnerable. Now, to the point of global oblivion. But it is the path our misadministration would take us down...and still has a year to do so.
Just to review:
A Sukhoi-24 (not a Mikoyan-Gurevich) was shot down by a Turkish F-16.
Turkey is a member of NATO, which doesn't really stand for "Normally America Takes Over" or "Nothing After Two O'clock"
LOAC (Law Of Armed Conflict) 101: Don't shoot at parachuting pilots, that's a war crime. I probably had more LOAC briefings than all the clowns shooting at the Ruskies combined.
An SU-24? Crap that thing looks like an FB-111 and the Su-24M (M is the model, as in there were A, B, C, D, E, you get the point) came out in 1983. You go up against a NATO F-16 without air-to-air capability in close proximity? You'll get smoked! Oh wait, that happened.
The Ruskies are notorious for making stuff that can't yank and bank. The MiG-25 Foxbat could do Mach 3, but 3 Gs and the tail breaks off. Vlad ain't got nothing but Su-24/34s and MiG 25s (cheap Ruskie excuse for the venerable A-10) in Syria unless he sneaked in some Mig-29s under IL-76s.
The guys shooting at the parachuting pilots? Probably shot the guy who tied to make them set through LOAC training (that's a joke, but there is a point there).
A Sukhoi-24 (not a Mikoyan-Gurevich) was shot down by a Turkish F-16.
Turkey is a member of NATO, which doesn't really stand for "Normally America Takes Over" or "Nothing After Two O'clock"
LOAC (Law Of Armed Conflict) 101: Don't shoot at parachuting pilots, that's a war crime. I probably had more LOAC briefings than all the clowns shooting at the Ruskies combined.
An SU-24? Crap that thing looks like an FB-111 and the Su-24M (M is the model, as in there were A, B, C, D, E, you get the point) came out in 1983. You go up against a NATO F-16 without air-to-air capability in close proximity? You'll get smoked! Oh wait, that happened.
The Ruskies are notorious for making stuff that can't yank and bank. The MiG-25 Foxbat could do Mach 3, but 3 Gs and the tail breaks off. Vlad ain't got nothing but Su-24/34s and MiG 25s (cheap Ruskie excuse for the venerable A-10) in Syria unless he sneaked in some Mig-29s under IL-76s.
The guys shooting at the parachuting pilots? Probably shot the guy who tied to make them set through LOAC training (that's a joke, but there is a point there).
Kind of like a security clearance: it keeps you from talking about what you just saw on TV.
When has that ever NOT been true?
You mean like when the Nazis were charged with war crimes they weren't signitures to.
Nope, not like that at all. Maybe you should go back and research of the legal underpinnings of the Nuremberg trials before you try to compare the two.
Are Americans war criminals if they use expanding bullets, even thoug we are not signatories to the conventions that prohibit them?
Last edited:
hoosierdoc
Freed prisoner
Agreed. But he knows what he wants, doesn't take crap from anyone, and won't back down.
But they use ball ammo overseas.
Most of the time yes, but not always. Either way, we aren't a signatory to the Hague conventions in question so I want to know if you still think we are war criminals for violating an agreement we never agreed to?
if we lose a war, and they convict us of war crimes, then guess what...
Once again, you really need to do a bit of research on the legal underpinnings of Nuremburg. It really had nothing to do with Conventions, especially since Germany was a signatory to most/all.
Intransigence and nuclear weapons aren't really a good combination.
