Yeah, Wesley Clarke is a loony 😮

Second, am I the only one here that finds it strange that a Turkish language TV program has english language graphics? I wonder who prepared these and who is the real intended viewer?

😀

So your point seems to be that if it couldn’t be made to work 45 years ago it can never be made to work, and should never be tried again, right?

Because obviously materials, engines, flight control systems, aerodynamic design, etc. have not improved in that time, eh?

Boy, I’m glad people like Orville & Wilbur Wright, Frank Whittle, Sydney Camm, Kelly Johnson, et al didn’t listen to people like you.

There were trade offs then and there are still trade offs now. Just look at the F35. Not only the F35B has its own trade offs compared to other models, but even the other models got trade-offs inherited from the constraint to develop a VSTOL variant (size, architecture etc). If you add everything, I’m pretty sure the US would be better off without the F35B whatsoever & that the other variants would be better performing if they had been developed without VSTOL in mind.

Nic

Finnish airspace is routinely violated by Russian, Swedish and NATO aircraft, often military aircraft, no biggie. We haven’t shot anyone down (yet). I understand that back in the day NATO aircraft used to rather deliberately violate Austrian airspace.

The difference is that Syria knows that NATO wants to attack, and the fact that it was a reconnaissance plane is quite telling. You can’t let your foe perform reconnaissance flights over your airspace freely if you know they’re going to attack you soon. It would be suicidal.

In my mind there is no doubt that Syria was justified in shooting down the Turkish RF4. I just hope the crew is found alive and well but I doubt it…

Quoted from the latest article:

“The question that needs to be asked here is if Syria shot down the plane out of animosity against Turkey,” commented Serkan Demirtas, Ankara bureau chief of the English-language Hurriyet Daily News. “The answer will determine Ankara’s approach toward Damascus.”

This sounds like a very sensible way to go.

Nic

People join an air force, or a military, for many reasons. Few, if any, have to do with an intent to kill anyone within your own country (or outside of it for that matter). An oath isn’t given only by the airman/soldier. It is also given by his commanders, and his leaders and president etc. The soldier isn’t supposed to “break his oath”, but for Assad it’s ok to break his oath (I’m sure that even in Syria, there’s some formality about a constitution etc etc).

How about the point in my answer that called to disobey orders and voice his opposition to them?

As a matter of fact the western countries all want to attack already, so we don’t need some gutless pilot to come out and tell us how bad Assad is. We’d already be there if Russia didn’t resist.

As for your first point, that’s your opinion, based on your far away knowledge of the situation or the people involved. You sure you know what you’re talking about?

You can’t be sure of anything, but judging from recent history (Libya) & many sources that are much more credible than your mainstream media outlet, I’m rather confident that I’m right.

What’s heroic about bombing your own neighbors on the orders of a madman?

This implies that both points of view, simply because they exist, are equally valid.

No.

– 1st, he would be bombing salafists & djihadists financed by quatar & whoever else.
– 2nd, if he doesn’t like it, he can still refuse the orders and face the consequences, or resign to get a desk job or do whatever else
– 3rd, when he joined the air force he probably had to made a pledge to serve, and obviously he isn’t true to his word to do so
– 4th, he chose to serve a madman. What does it tell you on someone, when he has no problem serving for years when no **** hit the fan, but soon as the situation changes he goes on to “protest” by defecting.

Nic

So what you think Nocolas, is Hollande going to be another vassal for the americans ? :confused:

On the official picture of hollande, you can see the flag of Hollande, and not the flag of France whatsoever. (the french word for the Netherlands). http://cache.20minutes.fr/img/photos/20mn/2012-06/2012-06-04/article_HollandOff2.jpg

Besides the french flag should be floating and not against a wall, & it should be supported by the side, and not from the top. Lastly it should never touch the ground. And it seems like it is resting on the stairs of the Elysée.

No french flag in the official picture of the new french president… what else can I say? :confused: