fluffyflops

Cyprus Airspace Closed...

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

We just had a brief from eurocontrol. I doubt today they have people inspecting douhma, (I know spelt wrong) so I doubt it 

Share this post


Link to post

And accroding to Limassol and Paphos airports flights in and out of Cyprus are taking place as sceduled...

 

Cheers

 

Mallard

Share this post


Link to post

I think they were put on notice but nothing happened, keep the commercial flights out of the area just in case. I saw a report the RAF was on notice in Cyprus so they could be involved as well.

Share this post


Link to post

it had been on the notams for 3 days about the area.. 

Share this post


Link to post

Yea it was basically just an air show, they had days to get anything important out.

They just bombed Syria after Syria bombed Syria to teach Syria not to bomb Syria, not sure they got the message

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Couldnt agree more, grandstanding at its best.  Although so much for those s400 the media had been banging on about

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds good as long as people are willing to ignore the fact that civilians were deliberately targeted by chemical weapons, and the allies targeted the facilities used to support use of said weapons (of mass destruction) against said civilians....

I imagine it must really suck to be a family trapped on the ground waiting for the chemicals to arrive, while people safe in their homes poo-poo at anything being done about it.

Yeah, this will probably be removed, and I'll probably be warned or worse, but hey.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Reality is Syria is the host of Russia's only naval base in the Mediterranean, which is vital for their Navy. Without it they have to pass through the Bosphorus Strait which is controlled by a NATO country.  They are not going to give up on Syria ever. 

The only thing that changes in the Middle East are the light bulbs. 

Edited by Matthew Kane

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmmmmmm.... It was once said the US would not give up Iran, ever.

The only thing constant is change.

Ask the Shah, or any of a seemingly endless string of strongmen who were sure they would rule for life, until they were reigned in by history.

And wasn't it also once said Russia would never give up Afghanistan? Or Poland? Or East Germany? Or.......

I never discount the sweep of history.

 

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Hmmmmmmm.... It was once said the US would not give up Iran, ever.

 

Too many differences

Russia is centuries old, USA is not, Russian Empire has been involved in this region for centuries when USA was developing as a nation, Russia has built bilateral relations with Syria since 1944, and also prior to that when the Russian Empire was engaged with the former Ottoman Empire, Russia has had support from pockets of that former region back then that continues today.

USA has no history like that in the region.

Edited by Matthew Kane

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Jim Young said:

And on the other side was the agreement signed between Syria and the Soviet Union signed in secret in 1946, which led to the Soviets support of the formation of the Syrian Arab Army, Syrian engagements since then were always backed by the Soviets which led to the opening of the Tartus Naval Base.

I could say a lot more about it but I have to go out this afternoon however those Documents seem to be missing quite a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
57 minutes ago, Matthew Kane said:

And on the other side was the agreement signed between Syria and the Soviet Union signed in secret in 1946, which led to the Soviets support of the formation of the Syrian Arab Army, Syrian engagements since then were always backed by the Soviets which led to the opening of the Tartus Naval Base.

I could say a lot more about it but I have to go out this afternoon however those Documents seem to be missing quite a lot.

Of course the documents are missing some things. As long and as complicated as the region's history is, you would need several encyclopedia sized books to cover it.

None of which I believe would support any intimation that the west, and the US in particular, has no role in the area due to the age of any existing Russian agreement with Syria.

In fact the history of Russia and the Syrian region has been one of constant war, and I'm sure the ghost of the Ottoman empire would be astonished to think it would ever come to be claimed that Russia had some natural right to Hegemony in the area.

Certainly most of the other remaining fragments of that empire would beg to differ!

As for the age of nations, heck, Syria as a sovereign country is younger than the United States, if we are trying to use age as some sort of proof of something. (which I don't think it is)

Also keep in mind that the west has had influence in the area for centuries as well, lest we forget the crusades etc, and western countries, primarily the British and French as well as their US ally, had and still have keen interest now, which I think is at least as legitimate as anything Russia can claim.

I would also point out that alliances are not always forever, and particularly in the case of strongmen, frequently don't outlast the death of the regime. The US has no bases in Iran, for instance, and history doesn't guarantee at all that Russia's grasp on the area will outlast Assad; which might be, we might guess, why Putin is so keen to prop him up......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

In recent history the West has a particularly strong record of encouraging carnage in the region, starting as mentioned with the Crusades.

Proxy wars have no winners, other than for the arms suppliers. So a lot of this stuff is fomented by the big arms exporters, and guess who they are… popping off a hundred or so million-dollar missiles surely would not hurt the bottom line. Taxpayers are a compliant lot, generally.

The host countries are the biggest losers: who remembers the Soviets vs Mujahideen, the latter gleefully supplied with Stinger missiles by the CIA? Within that movement was the Taliban, currently top Afghan dog, and now supplied with Russian weaponry against the western-installed regime.

I enjoy hot topics like this one, it gets you reading. I learned that the RAF’s Storm Shadow cruise missile is shared by France who call it a SCALP. Both were used here. In theory a Tornado could sit on the runway at Akrotiri and release one against Damascus, a mere 200 miles away. You’d think they would save a bit of jet fuel and make the thing launchable like a V1.

Share this post


Link to post

All true as far as it goes. My objection to conversations like this is that the finger pointing is nearly always extremely one-sided, with many examples of western and particularly US troubles in the area, but with Russia often strangely given a free pass. US arms companies profiting? Yup, bigly. But so do Soviet arms suppliers, which somehow so often go unmentioned.

Why is that, I wonder? Perhaps it's just easier (and safer!) to sneer at leaders of free countries......?

What I myself look for in these confrontations is national goals, and more importantly, a country's methods of achieving them.

As a general rule, and especially in the later half of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century, the US most often works in consensus with willing partners and leads by persuasion. (And in this case moral suasion and shared outrage)

Whether one thinks Western partners and Nato should be less willing is a matter of opinion, but at least in the west it's an open debate, moderated by interested parties, media, elected officials, and the mechanisms of a diverse and free press that between its various viewpoints on a given issue does a pretty good job of keeping the public informed.

A public that abhors the use of weapons of mass destruction against anyone, especially civilians, and is prone to expecting its leaders to do something about it when such a thing occurs.

Pitted against this are systems with tightly controlled media of all sorts including the Internet. Captive media that serves almost exclusively as arms of government propaganda, leading to a blinkered/blinded/manipulated public with restricted access to alternative sources of information and a leadership whos enemies have a disturbing tendency to turn up jailed or dead. A government who selects allies of the same sort.

The west has its own levels of suckiness, but if I had to choose between the two........ :emu_melk:

In the meanwhile, the current chain of events is pretty much inevitable because pictures of dead people frothing at the mouth from a chemical attack deliberately targeted at civilians is pretty much like waving a red flag at a bull. This is especially true in the west, which simply can't sit idly by while weapons of mass destruction are used against civilians. Public opinion won't stand for it, even as we look away while Assad destroys his people with conventional weapons.

The truth is Assad will probably win with Soviet aid because we really don't care enough to actually exert ourselves to stop him. BUT he should keep in mind that he's going to get smacked every single time the chemical weapons come out, and if he doesnt want that to happen, he and his Soviet minders (who first claimed there was no attack, then said it was terrorists, then finally settled on a western plot) should restrain themselves and just quietly massacre their people, while we get on with dinner and a movie. Cynical as hell, also pretty truthful. Its a cold, cold world.

In the meantime:

No

Chemical

Weapons!

Share this post


Link to post

Top Arms Exporters 2012-2016, USD Million:

1 United States 47,169

2 Russia 33,186

3 Europe 30,877

Did you notice these are the foreign players in Syria?

The Internetz will have a very great effect on the lies gummints tell their people; yes, yours too, whoever that might be. It's called Propaganda, and is an essential part of every "war" effort.

It's a very strong reason to support Net Neutrality. 

Edited by WingZ
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wheres the proof if was his chemical weapons, I've not seen a shred of evidence.  I've seen a bunch of videos of kids being hosed down by people with no gloves on. The same people that have been caught before making staged videos and the same people that beheaded a 12 year old. 

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, tooting said:

Wheres the proof if was his chemical weapons, I've not seen a shred of evidence.  I've seen a bunch of videos of kids being hosed down by people with no gloves on. The same people that have been caught before making staged videos and the same people that beheaded a 12 year old. 

I was preparing big old looooong reply detailing some of the evidence, but honestly, I eventually realized it wouldn't be any use.

If the above constitutes your actual chain of logic, despite all the information and history out there, I doubt there's anything I might say that you would find convincing, and I would waste an awful lot of electronic ink attempting to do so.

I believe Occam's razor counter-indicates the premise that the rebels gassed themselves, then immediately surrendered, but so be it.

I would just say that it seems much more logical to me that Syria saved itself a lot of prolonged street-by-street battles by using a WMD against this already surrounded town and showing what would happen if resistance continued.

Some things to consider: https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Timeline-of-Syrian-Chemical-Weapons-Activity

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, tooting said:

Wheres the proof if was his chemical weapons, I've not seen a shred of evidence.  I've seen a bunch of videos of kids being hosed down by people with no gloves on. The same people that have been caught before making staged videos and the same people that beheaded a 12 year old. 

Is your google-fu not up to the task of seeing for yourself?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html

Quote

ISTANBUL — The poison used in the deadly chemical bomb attack in a rebel-held part of northern Syria this week was the banned nerve agent sarin, the Turkish Health Ministry said in a statement on Thursday.

The statement from Turkey, where many of the stricken Syrians were taken after the assault on Tuesday, was the most specific about the cause.

“According to the results of preliminary tests,” the statement said, “patients were exposed to chemical material (Sarin).”

...The Turkish statement said the sarin conclusion had been based on autopsies on three victims performed at Turkey’s Adana Forensic Medicine Institution with the participation of representatives from the World Health Organization and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a group based in The Hague that monitors compliance with the global treaty that bans such munitions.

 

Share this post


Link to post

And the other 51 times chemical weapons had been used by ISIS in the area??? 

And remember this?? That everyone believed until the video showing it was set up?? 

6c0a565e88cbdae76b6dc33cd907654f.jpg

I dont buy it.  

The only evidence they have is a helicopter was flying in the area the day of the chemical attack.  If you read what Boris Johnson said in the Times today, that is what they are basing it on. A helicopter in the area, that's it 

What I do believe is that very big gas or oil (I forget which) pipe line assad wants running through Syria. 

What I do believe is both Saddam and Gaddafi wanted rid of the petrol dollar and wanted a petrol dinari in stead. We all know what happened to them. 

Assad should of gone 8 years ago and he was just about to defeat isis in that last area. Both the US, UK and Israel don't like that. So in the last few weeks before he's got rid of isis a 'helicopter' just happens to drop some sarin or chlorine. 

Finally please explain but assad had to gain by doing it and what we have to gain by toppling him and replacing him, bearing in mind what happened when we did that In Afghanistan, Iraq and libya

Edited by tooting

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.