http://news.sky.com/story/1579327/russian-passenger-plane-crashes-over-egypt
224 on board
Terrible tragedy. may they RIP
IS claiming they downed it. Russia saying it was a technical fault.
With Russia and Egypt involved it's unlikely a clear, transparent cause will ever see the light of day.
Typical western response. Everybody else is a corrupt. Only we can get to the truth. ::)
Bodies are scattered over a three mile radius. Sounds like the plane broke up in the air somehow.
Russia moves a warship of the coast of Israel. Now this happens...
Quote from: pullhard on November 01, 2015, 08:41:23 AM
Russia moves a warship of the coast of Israel. Now this happens...
Seems you are insinuating the Israeli's did it, they did not, they would not blow up a plane full of civilians, they would blow the feck out of Moscow.
Quote from: stew on November 01, 2015, 01:18:24 PM
Quote from: pullhard on November 01, 2015, 08:41:23 AM
Russia moves a warship of the coast of Israel. Now this happens...
Seems you are insinuating the Israeli's did it, they did not, they would not blow up a plane full of civilians, they would blow the feck out of Moscow.
a) it doesn't seem like that's what he's insinuating at all.
b) no they wouldn't. Netanyahu and his cronies only make war on people armed with considerably less than what Uncle Sam gives them.
Quote from: pullhard on November 01, 2015, 08:41:23 AM
Russia moves a warship of the coast of Israel. Now this happens...
Pullhard do you think there is a possibility the Israeli's had a hand in this?
I find the IS claim strange. If it was over Syria/Iraq etc maybe , but Sinai ? Don't get me wrong, I'm not naïve, I have no doubt IS are active all over the middle east from Sinai, Gaza, lebanon etc however If they have that kind of weaponry why would they have it in Sinai when they could be using it in Syria ? It doesn't add up.
If it wasn't IS then I think we are heading into false flag territory. Somebody claiming to be IS claims it to divert attention.
I don't think we should ever discount US involvement either.
It is possible that it was actually a technical fault.
Quote from: GJL on November 01, 2015, 05:40:48 PM
It is possible that it was actually a technical fault.
Ah what sort of conspiracy theory is that?
Quote from: Hardy on November 01, 2015, 06:41:41 PM
Quote from: GJL on November 01, 2015, 05:40:48 PM
It is possible that it was actually a technical fault.
Yes a technical fault caused by a disgruntled Airbus employee.
Ah what sort of conspiracy theory is that?
Smacks a lot of the plane from New York which blew up some years ago,enroute to Paris.Ultimately it was discovered that this was simply a faulty fuse which caused a spark to reach the fuel tank,causing the fatal explosion.
Quote from: Hardy on November 01, 2015, 06:41:41 PM
Quote from: GJL on November 01, 2015, 05:40:48 PM
It is possible that it was actually a technical fault.
Ah what sort of conspiracy theory is that?
Probably the correct one.
Looking like this plane was shot down or else it was a bomb on board. Russia will show no mercy to whoever done this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34697416 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34697416)
I think it needs to be debated in order to rule it out.
Quote from: Hereiam on November 02, 2015, 10:19:32 AM
Looking like this plane was shot down or else it was a bomb on board. Russia will show no mercy to whoever done this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34697416 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34697416)
That is an airline official pointing the finger away from the airline.
You have an investigation featuring the Russians, the Egyptians and the Irish Aviation Authority.
This will take a long time and may tell us very little.
This happened two years ago and there is still no final report: http://www.ibtimes.com/tatarstan-airlines-crash-emblematic-russias-poor-aviation-safety-record-1473544 (http://www.ibtimes.com/tatarstan-airlines-crash-emblematic-russias-poor-aviation-safety-record-1473544)
Russia's safety record is shocking and to my mind would be the first place I would go looking.
jeez, Muppet...you are not going all "careful now lads" on us are you ? We are relying on your aviation expertise !
Quote from: muppet on March 10, 2014, 11:59:44 AM
So what could cause a jet with circa 250 people on board to just disappear without a trace, just as it reaches it's cruising level?
1) Catastrophic mechanical failure: there are reports on PPRUNE that this aircraft had a minor collision on the ground a few years ago causing damage to the wing tip. I would think it is very unlikely to be a factor 2 years later. Modern aircraft just don't have this type of failure. AF447 started with major failures to the cockpit instruments but that was caused by atrocious weather and a poor response from the co-pilots, weather doesn't seem to be a factor here.
2) A bomb: The fact that it was just reaching it's cruise level makes this a possibility for me. Before all of the recent developments in electronics, bomb makers used to use a type of barometer to detonate bombs on aircraft. As the cabin pressure climbs, and the difference between pressure inside the cain and outside increases, the barometer would measure this and aim to detonate at high altitude to give the bomb the opportunity to do maximum damage. Even with modern electronics, the most effective time for a bomb on board is while the aircraft is pressurised to the maximum, which starts as you reach your cruising level, so whatever device is used this would be the optimum time to detonate a bomb.
Quote from: Kursk on November 02, 2015, 10:27:13 PM
jeez, Muppet...you are not going all "careful now lads" on us are you ? We are relying on your aviation expertise !
Quote from: muppet on March 10, 2014, 11:59:44 AM
So what could cause a jet with circa 250 people on board to just disappear without a trace, just as it reaches it's cruising level?
1) Catastrophic mechanical failure: there are reports on PPRUNE that this aircraft had a minor collision on the ground a few years ago causing damage to the wing tip. I would think it is very unlikely to be a factor 2 years later. Modern aircraft just don't have this type of failure. AF447 started with major failures to the cockpit instruments but that was caused by atrocious weather and a poor response from the co-pilots, weather doesn't seem to be a factor here.
2) A bomb: The fact that it was just reaching it's cruise level makes this a possibility for me. Before all of the recent developments in electronics, bomb makers used to use a type of barometer to detonate bombs on aircraft. As the cabin pressure climbs, and the difference between pressure inside the cain and outside increases, the barometer would measure this and aim to detonate at high altitude to give the bomb the opportunity to do maximum damage. Even with modern electronics, the most effective time for a bomb on board is while the aircraft is pressurised to the maximum, which starts as you reach your cruising level, so whatever device is used this would be the optimum time to detonate a bomb.
That post could just as easily be written for this latest accident, except this latest one hadn't quite reached their cruising level.
I presume you took that from the Malaysian crash thread, but didn't refer to any of my other posts.
To my mind, this one more resembles the AirAsia crash, rather than the Malaysian, as they found the wreckage immediately.
Or maybe it was it caused by a Western Hegemony?
Muppet are you also an aviation expert as well as a Catholic Cleric Child Abuse expert?
Quote from: T Fearon on November 02, 2015, 11:03:39 PM
Muppet are you also an aviation expert as well as a Catholic Cleric Child Abuse expert?
You are the child abuse expert Tony.
Quote from: muppet on November 02, 2015, 10:34:46 PM
Quote from: Kursk on November 02, 2015, 10:27:13 PM
jeez, Muppet...you are not going all "careful now lads" on us are you ? We are relying on your aviation expertise !
Quote from: muppet on March 10, 2014, 11:59:44 AM
So what could cause a jet with circa 250 people on board to just disappear without a trace, just as it reaches it's cruising level?
1) Catastrophic mechanical failure: there are reports on PPRUNE that this aircraft had a minor collision on the ground a few years ago causing damage to the wing tip. I would think it is very unlikely to be a factor 2 years later. Modern aircraft just don't have this type of failure. AF447 started with major failures to the cockpit instruments but that was caused by atrocious weather and a poor response from the co-pilots, weather doesn't seem to be a factor here.
2) A bomb: The fact that it was just reaching it's cruise level makes this a possibility for me. Before all of the recent developments in electronics, bomb makers used to use a type of barometer to detonate bombs on aircraft. As the cabin pressure climbs, and the difference between pressure inside the cain and outside increases, the barometer would measure this and aim to detonate at high altitude to give the bomb the opportunity to do maximum damage. Even with modern electronics, the most effective time for a bomb on board is while the aircraft is pressurised to the maximum, which starts as you reach your cruising level, so whatever device is used this would be the optimum time to detonate a bomb.
That post could just as easily be written for this latest accident, except this latest one hadn't quite reached their cruising level.
I presume you took that from the Malaysian crash thread, but didn't refer to any of my other posts.
To my mind, this one more resembles the AirAsia crash, rather than the Malaysian, as they found the wreckage immediately.
Or maybe it was it caused by a Western Hegemony?
well, now that you mention it, there was that Iran Air flight........
The Russian plane that crashed in Egypt at the weekend "may well have been brought down by an explosive device", Downing Street has said.
All flights between the UK and Sharm el-Sheikh have been suspended on Wednesday evening as UK experts assess security at the Egyptian airport.
Number 10 said flights had been delayed as a "precautionary measure" after "more information has come to light".
Russian Airbus 321 crashed on Saturday, killing all 224 people on board.
"We would underline that this is a precautionary step and we are working closely with the airlines on this approach," a Number 10 spokesman said.
Aviation experts have travelled to Egypt to make an assessment of the security arrangements at the Egyptian airport and expect to complete an investigation tonight.
Their findings will be considered in a meeting of the government's Cobra emergency committee, chaired by Prime Minister David Cameron, which is under way.
Egypt's President Sisi is currently in the UK, and is due to meet the prime minister on Thursday. They spoke on Tuesday before Downing Street released its statement.
'An explosive device'
Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin said the delays would allow UK experts time to make sure "the right security measures are in place".
"We can not categorically say why the Russia jet crashed but we have become concerned that the plane may well have been brought down as a result of an explosive device," he said.
'Explosive device' could be something on board as well as something fired at the aircraft.
If it was something on board the next question would be: was it malicious or accidental?
Obviously they have found evidence of something very sudden, maybe on the voice recorder of the FDR. They may also be able, from looking at the wreckage, be able to guess where on board the sudden event began. For example, if they suspect an explosion in the rear cargo hold, they might suspend flights until they can rule out a bomb. Of course they may clear evidence of a bomb and are unwilling to comment straight away.
Under the usual protocols, they must issue a preliminary report at around 30 days. Hopefully we know more before then.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/04/africa/russian-plane-crash-egypt-sinai/
(CNN)[Breaking news alert, posted at 3:15 p.m. ET Wednesday]
The latest U.S. intelligence suggests that the crash of Metrojet Flight 9268 was most likely caused by a bomb on the plane planted by ISIS or an ISIS affiliate, according to a U.S. official familiar with the matter. The official stressed that there has not been a formal conclusion reached by the U.S. intelligence community. "There is a definite feeling it was an explosive device planted in luggage or somewhere on the plane," the official told CNN's Barbara Starr.
The assessment was reached, the official said, by looking back at intelligence reports that had been gathered before Saturday's plane crash and intelligence gathered since then. The United States did not have credible or verified intelligence of a specific threat prior to the crash, however, the official said, prior to the incident, "there had been additional activity in Sinai that had caught our attention."
Another U.S. official said the intelligence regarding ISIS is in part based on monitoring of internal messages of the terrorist group. Those messages are separate from public ISIS claims of responsibility, that official said.
Not sure why the Brits are announcing this when the investigation is being carried out by the Irish, Russians and Egyptians.
This is all political bullshit. It suits the American and British narrative to suggest that it was ISIS as it puts pressure on Russia to engage them in Syria and not the Free Syria army they are currently bombing.
Not that I'm rubbishing the suggestion but it's equally as likely that the West will warp the truth to suit themselves as quick as the Russians will do it. That's what all this breaking news/leaks/intelligence info is really about. You didn't see the Brits or Langley wading in with their two cents when the Malaysia flight disappeared as readily or as staunchly as this.
When you sit back and look at it Russia and the West are really just two sides of the same coin, both as morally corrupt as the other, where the only real objective either has is the humiliation of the opposing side.
Quote from: trileacman on November 04, 2015, 08:30:30 PM
This is all political bullshit. It suits the American and British narrative to suggest that it was ISIS as it puts pressure on Russia to engage them in Syria and not the Free Syria army they are currently bombing.
Not that I'm rubbishing the suggestion but it's equally as likely that the West will warp the truth to suit themselves as quick as the Russians will do it. That's what all this breaking news/leaks/intelligence info is really about. You didn't see the Brits or Langley wading in with their two cents when the Malaysia flight disappeared as readily or as staunchly as this.
When you sit back and look at it Russia and the West are really just two sides of the same coin, both as morally corrupt as the other, where the only real objective either has is the humiliation of the opposing side.
It suits the Russians to say it was bomb too though. The last thing they want is for Russian incompetence to be the cause of Russian deaths.
It doesn't suit the Egyptians for it to be a bomb, as it will seriously harm their tourist industry. But even yesterday, I met a fella who said to me "Sharm el-Sheikh will be dirt cheap now so I might go". So who knows what effect it will have.
Quote from: muppet on November 04, 2015, 08:34:39 PM
Quote from: trileacman on November 04, 2015, 08:30:30 PM
This is all political bullshit. It suits the American and British narrative to suggest that it was ISIS as it puts pressure on Russia to engage them in Syria and not the Free Syria army they are currently bombing.
Not that I'm rubbishing the suggestion but it's equally as likely that the West will warp the truth to suit themselves as quick as the Russians will do it. That's what all this breaking news/leaks/intelligence info is really about. You didn't see the Brits or Langley wading in with their two cents when the Malaysia flight disappeared as readily or as staunchly as this.
When you sit back and look at it Russia and the West are really just two sides of the same coin, both as morally corrupt as the other, where the only real objective either has is the humiliation of the opposing side.
It suits the Russians to say it was bomb too though. The last thing they want is for Russian incompetence to be the cause of Russian deaths.
It doesn't suit the Egyptians for it to be a bomb, as it will seriously harm their tourist industry. But even yesterday, I met a fella who said to me "Sharm el-Sheikh will be dirt cheap now so I might go". So who knows what effect it will have.
Maybe so. My frustration is just at this Cold War shadow games bullshit that's going forth as international diplomacy now. God forbid that several of the worlds most powerful nations would divert all the effort and resources that they currently expend trying to embarrass each other and do something useful for the world like feed the starving or save the rainforest.
By now I would have expected Cameron to back up his claim from last night that: "We cannot be certain that the Russian airliner was brought down by a terrorist bomb, but it looks increasingly likely that that was the case,"
Worse than that, the Egyptian President happens to be in London on an official visit and they knew nothing about Cameron's information until he announced it. He still has offered no evidence for his claim.
Egypt & Russia, who are actually involved in the investigation, both seem to disagree with him today: Russia said such theories were "speculation", while Egypt said there was "no evidence" yet to support them.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34732213 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34732213)
It isn't clear where Cameron got his info, but it doesn't appear to be from the investigation. So you would have to guess it was from an intelligence source. The UK intelligence people brought us Saddam's Weapons of Mass Production in the past. If Cameron is proven wrong, or that he jumped the gun, he will look monumentally stupid, especially as thousands of Brits are now stranded in Egypt indefinitely as a result of his claim.
Having said that, how many died from Blair's claim regarding Hussain, and no one seems to mind?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/russia-and-egypt-brush-off-british-suggestion-that-bomb-caused-plane-to-crash/2015/11/05/948df81c-834a-11e5-8bd2-680fff868306_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/russia-and-egypt-brush-off-british-suggestion-that-bomb-caused-plane-to-crash/2015/11/05/948df81c-834a-11e5-8bd2-680fff868306_story.html)
BREAKING: President Obama said in an interview with Seattle-based KIRO Radio that "I think there is a possibility that there was a bomb on board and we're taking that very seriously."
LONDON — Russia and Egypt dismissed as "speculation" British suggestions Thursday that a bomb caused a Russian jetliner to crash in the Sinai Peninsula, while Britain drafted plans to bring home thousands of tourists amid concerns over airport security in the Egyptian resort city of Sharm el-Sheikh.
Obama is still only calling it a possibility.
Cameron is looking increasingly daft at the moment. I am guessing that his security advisor is louder than his other advisors. I would hate to be going near British airports in the next few days, they are bad enough as they are.
Pprune is talking about info suggesting that the event, and the CVR/FDR stopping, all happened 'at the same time'. So whatever it was happened instantly. By contrast, Lockerbie was a bomb and there was 'a 180-millisecond hissing noise could be heard as the explosion destroyed the aircraft's communications centre', which is why I put parentheses around 'at the same time'. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103#Explosion_and_Collision_timeline (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103#Explosion_and_Collision_timeline))
There is no source for any of this info so it should be take with a pinch of salt.
Also there is a terrible story about a baby girl found 20/25 miles from the main crash site.
For what it is worth, the current pprune theory is a massive failure of the Horizontal Stabiliser (the small wing at the back left and right of the tail), such that it pulled away the rear of the aircraft. I can't recall ever hearing of anything like that.
Are you a aircraft engineer by any chance?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 05, 2015, 11:49:33 PM
Are you a aircraft engineer by any chance?
No, but there is a former engineer that posts here.
Quote from: muppet on November 05, 2015, 11:53:37 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 05, 2015, 11:49:33 PM
Are you a aircraft engineer by any chance?
No, but there is a former engineer that posts here.
Worked in Bombardier myself and delivered level 3 in aeronautical engineering fitting, wouldn't say it was a mechanical fault but the investigation would settle any reasons as to why it crashed... To use other sources at the minute would be daft, in my little knowledge of it
The Brits really going for it now:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34742273 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34742273)
UK investigators looking at what caused a Russian airliner to crash in Egypt believe a bomb was put in the hold prior to take-off, the BBC has learned.
I feel fairly certain that if the cause was a bomb, the investigators would have evidence by now. If it was in the hold, examining the baggage from the different holds could clearly indicate which bags were close to the explosion. All bags are bar-coded, so even if bags beside the bomb were completely destroyed, if all missing bags were in the same location, that would be a serious clue. There should be also be evidence in the wreckage. Aside from the traces of explosives and blast damage (I'll have to leave that to someone else) there should be clear damage on the wreckage showing where the hole was created.
It is possible that the Brits intelligence is correct, and that the team of investigators are either unless (bloody foreigners) or that they are showing remarkable circumspection and saying nothing yet (remember the French investigators leaked everything in the Germanwings crash as soon as they found it). But remember the Brits history with bomb investigation? Birmingham 6 anyone?
If it was a bomb, airports anywhere near a 'security threat' will become a nightmare. The British airports will go from awful to insufferable.
If it wasn't a bomb, then Cameron will have made an idiot of himself on the world stage.
Hindsight will eventually make at least half of the above post look foolish, but I am praying it wasn't a bomb.
I would say that there is very little chance of the British government coming out and more or less saying that it was a bomb without some decent evidence to back this up.
The fact is they know the Russians will say nothing and the Egyptians will say even less, so they probably feel within their rights to go so public so early with this.
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:17:34 AM
I would say that there is very little chance of the British government coming out and more or less saying that it was a bomb without some decent evidence to back this up.
The fact is they know the Russians will say nothing and the Egyptians will say even less, so they probably feel within their rights to go so public so early with this.
The Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) are also investigating as is Airbus.
The Brits are not involved officially, although there may be some Brits involved with Airbus or the IAA.
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:17:34 AM
I would say that there is very little chance of the British government coming out and more or less saying that it was a bomb without some decent evidence to back this up.
The fact is they know the Russians will say nothing and the Egyptians will say even less, so they probably feel within their rights to go so public so early with this.
The Brits were happy enough to shout about WMD when it didn't exist.
The Brits claim they heard 'chatter' before and after the crash.
If they knew before, well you can make up your own minds on that...........
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 10:34:18 AM
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:17:34 AM
I would say that there is very little chance of the British government coming out and more or less saying that it was a bomb without some decent evidence to back this up.
The fact is they know the Russians will say nothing and the Egyptians will say even less, so they probably feel within their rights to go so public so early with this.
The Brits were happy enough to shout about WMD when it didn't exist.
Where is the end game then for this AZ for them to claim it to be a bomb?
well all know the WMD end game, just hard to figure in this situation?
Possibly trying to force some sort of push against ISIS, on a multilateral basis.
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:58:47 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 10:34:18 AM
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:17:34 AM
I would say that there is very little chance of the British government coming out and more or less saying that it was a bomb without some decent evidence to back this up.
The fact is they know the Russians will say nothing and the Egyptians will say even less, so they probably feel within their rights to go so public so early with this.
The Brits were happy enough to shout about WMD when it didn't exist.
Where is the end game then for this AZ for them to claim it to be a bomb?
well all know the WMD end game, just hard to figure in this situation?
If I was a conspiracy theorist there would be some obvious 'benefits' for the UK & US.
1. Get the Russians on board in the fight againt ISIS, so they will focus on them rather than the FSA. They have already said keeping Assad is not a deal breaker.
2. Get the Egyptians on board to drive ISIS out of the Sinai and secure Israel & Palestines southern borders.
Quote from: LeoMc on November 06, 2015, 03:16:36 PM
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:58:47 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 10:34:18 AM
Quote from: NAG1 on November 06, 2015, 10:17:34 AM
I would say that there is very little chance of the British government coming out and more or less saying that it was a bomb without some decent evidence to back this up.
The fact is they know the Russians will say nothing and the Egyptians will say even less, so they probably feel within their rights to go so public so early with this.
The Brits were happy enough to shout about WMD when it didn't exist.
Where is the end game then for this AZ for them to claim it to be a bomb?
well all know the WMD end game, just hard to figure in this situation?
If I was a conspiracy theorist there would be some obvious 'benefits' for the UK & US.
1. Get the Russians on board in the fight againt ISIS, so they will focus on them rather than the FSA. They have already said keeping Assad is not a deal breaker.
2. Get the Egyptians on board to drive ISIS out of the Sinai and secure Israel & Palestines southern borders.
Gaza will end up with ISIS the way Israel's treatment of the strip is going.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 11:00:11 AM
Possibly trying to force some sort of push against ISIS, on a multilateral basis.
The West is really lost trying to fight ISIS. Saudi is on the ball with infrastructure and money and it's also a key oil supplier so there's a huge conflict there.
The flight cancellations will be a disaster for the egyptian economy. Sharm is a big source of foreign currency and to get there from Cairo you have to pass through 5 checkpoints- it's an artificial holiday oasis a long way from the real Egypt. Loads of cash implications for a poor country.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/nov/06/tourists-return-from-egypt-amid-reports-bomb-in-hold-downed-russian-airliner-live-updates
Quote from: seafoid on November 06, 2015, 04:22:52 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 11:00:11 AM
Possibly trying to force some sort of push against ISIS, on a multilateral basis.
The West is really lost trying to fight ISIS. Saudi is on the ball with infrastructure and money and it's also a key oil supplier so there's a huge conflict there.
Ever wonder why the US decided to sent in ground troops just when Russia started kicking ISIS ass?
Quote from: Seamus on November 07, 2015, 02:22:16 AM
Quote from: seafoid on November 06, 2015, 04:22:52 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 11:00:11 AM
Possibly trying to force some sort of push against ISIS, on a multilateral basis.
The West is really lost trying to fight ISIS. Saudi is on the ball with infrastructure and money and it's also a key oil supplier so there's a huge conflict there.
Ever wonder why the US decided to sent in ground troops just when Russia started kicking ISIS ass?
the US would never invade Saudi...
Quote from: Seamus on November 07, 2015, 02:22:16 AM
Quote from: seafoid on November 06, 2015, 04:22:52 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 06, 2015, 11:00:11 AM
Possibly trying to force some sort of push against ISIS, on a multilateral basis.
The West is really lost trying to fight ISIS. Saudi is on the ball with infrastructure and money and it's also a key oil supplier so there's a huge conflict there.
Ever wonder why th
I am wondering with the commander in Chief decides to let the world know 50 of his finest are in the region?
The man is a half wit!
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-provided-intel-on-suspected-bomb-on-russian-jet-report/ (http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-provided-intel-on-suspected-bomb-on-russian-jet-report/)
Here is a post from pprune that I thought was interesting and worth copying here:
"There seems to be a total confusion about security procedures at Egyptian airports. In order to GET IN TO THE TERMINAL you need to stand in a long queue, at the end of which a regular (possibly illiterate) policeman checks your passport and ticket, and if he succeeds in matching at least parts of the name in your passport with the name on a printed piece of paper apearing to be a ticket (in the age of e-tickets, no it is not good on a computer or phone ) and also manages to find a date somewhere that matches the currect date, he will let you in. There is an x-ray machine at the entrance of the check-in area where all luggage gets an initial screening. This is NOT a security screening but a customs screening, they are primarily looking not for weapons/explosives but for contraband (antiquities, in Sharm corals and other marine life, etc.). There is also a metal detector gate, but in practice if it beeps they look at you, if a foreigner they just wave you through.
The $20 VIP channel will only allow you to bypass the entrance passport check and customs screening before check in. After your luggage gets checked in, it undergoes the regular X-ray security screening just like everywhere else in the world (for all its worth), and passengers get screened twice, once after passport control, then again at the boarding gate. Screening is no worse than anywhere else in the world (but staff are much friendlier than the average screener in Europe or the US), but of course it offers zero protection against anyone with an airside pass, just like everywhere else in the world."
Can't post the link at the moment but ISIS has published what it claims was the device.
Also Russia are saying they have found traces of explosives.
My very poor understanding of what is going on in Syria had it that the Russians were bombing Syrian rebels, not ISIS. But it is hard to know wtf is going on there.
Quote from: muppet on November 18, 2015, 05:21:43 PM
Can't post the link at the moment but ISIS has published what it claims was the device.
Also Russia are saying they have found traces of explosives.
My very poor understanding of what is going on in Syria had it that the Russians were bombing Syrian rebels, not ISIS. But it is hard to know wtf is going on there.
The Russians were backing Assads regime (Shia) and so were seen as the enemy of ISIS (Sunni) whether attacking them directly or not.
Quote from: muppet on November 18, 2015, 05:21:43 PM
Can't post the link at the moment but ISIS has published what it claims was the device.
Also Russia are saying they have found traces of explosives.
My very poor understanding of what is going on in Syria had it that the Russians were bombing Syrian rebels, not ISIS. But it is hard to know wtf is going on there.
Russia see Assad's government as the only legitimate force in Syria. Everyone fighting against them is a terrorist and so are targets. The "west" see Isis as the only enemy in Syria as the others were the ones the were backing originally against Assad.
Who the Russians are/aren't bombing depends on whether you watch Fox or RT.