Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ketara wrote:

 obsidianaura wrote:


I don't know if people are saying what Turkey did was a war crime I meant the killing of the pilots coming down by parachute is.

It depends. Generally, a war crime is committed by a conventional military against a third party. That's why people aren't regarding what happened in Paris as a 'war crime' but a terrorist attack.

When a state military has been lobbing explosives into your back yard for a few weeks, and killed half a dozen neighbours, is it a war crime to gun down members of aforementioned military? One one hand, they're defenceless. On the other, they're uniformed members of a military that's doing it's best to kill you when you have done nothing to it, that you have little way at striking back at.

I'm aware this would qualify for any British pilots shot down in Iraq right now and captured by ISIS, and I am not saying that it is morally right or correct. But I am also aware that this is a moral gray area, and labelling it a 'war crime' seems extreme.

The labelling of it as a war crime may be accurate though. Whilst untested through the jurisprudence of the ICC this is classic war crime territory where allegedly unarmed and possibly injured personnel have been killed. It does not seem too much of a stretch to refer to this as a war crime as it fits the criterion we generally use. The morality is entirely separate to the law but the law seems to support the labelling of the behaviour as a potential war crime.

Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

That may not be wise. So far Russia is 2-0....

 obsidianaura wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 obsidianaura wrote:


Turkey is saying that the pilots are alive still.

This is rather confusing.

The pilots being dead, and killed in the way they were by people getting Turkish support, undermines Turkey's attempt to paint blame on Russia. So they're gonna do exactly what they do with most of their embarrassing blunders (Armenian Genocide); pretend it totally didn't happen and everything is just hunky dory

So right now, they are both alive and dead.

An Austrian scientist might find that amusing.

Open the box, dammit !

 Frazzled wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

That may not be wise. So far Russia is 2-0....

Do we include civilians Russia is alleged to have killed?

In which case its 400-2 in favour of Russia for that area :S

 LethalShade wrote:
Open the box, dammit !

Thank you for that . Good to have a bit of humor in all this...

 Frazzled wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Why are you speechless? Thats how war works. They try to kill you if they can.

Ask yourself if you would be saying this if it was an American helicopter trying to recover the bodies of American pilots that had just been shot by terrorists.

You mean like in Vietnam? Like Korea? Like Afghanistan? Again, what do you think war is?
Why are they terrorists? They are fighting against a dictator. Your dictator just happens to like their dictator.

I don't like the idea that UK is funding people who would do this. I hope the western countries involved will think about what has happened and sort them out.

Indeed, we need to pass out medals at once. Shooting down a helicopter with an antitank missile takes skill.

Just because it also happened in wars the US was in, doesn't mean it isn't terrible and that it shouldn't happen.

As for why they are terrorists? I don't know, maybe because they use live humans as meat shields?

Why are you saying people that committed a war crime deserve to get a medal? Is it supposed to be funny? You're terribly failing at it, if so.

The pilots are most likely dead - at least one of them is, as confirmed by the video that's been circulating in which the terrorists reportedly regret that they hadn’t burned him on the spot.

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

on any Turkish backed rebels in syria then, there a target. and in syria, Turkey cannot protect them.

The best I can tell the original report is from CNN Turk (on the status of the pilots). CNN Turk reported that one pilot is dead, and one has been captured. All the oldest reports I can find report one dead and the second missing/captured.

Apparently there was some other Turkmen group (not the one in the original CNN Turk Report), that claimed to have shot and killed the pilots as they were coming down. Possibly responsible for the death of the one already reportedly dead pilot.

Turkey is claiming both pilots are alive and that it is negotiating their release. I am skeptical.

 LordofHats wrote:
The best I can tell the original report is from CNN Turk (on the status of the pilots). CNN Turk reported that one pilot is dead, and one has been captured. All the oldest reports I can find report one dead and the second missing/captured.

Apparently there was some other Turkmen group (not the one in the original CNN Turk Report), that claimed to have shot and killed the pilots as they were coming down. Possibly responsible for the death of the one already reportedly dead pilot.

Turkey is claiming both pilots are alive and that it is negotiating their release. I am skeptical.

One of them might be alive, but the other is most definitely dead.

They were both shot in the air according to Russia Today.

 thenoobbomb wrote:


The pilots are most likely dead - at least one of them is, as confirmed by the video that's been circulating in which the terrorists reportedly regret that they hadn’t burned him on the spot.

The video would actually seem to lend weight to one of the pilots maybe still being alive. The men were saying they should have burned him, but they obviously weren't in the video. This guy could still be out there in (mostly) one piece?

The picture of the body they've shown does not look like it was shot up on the way down. Looks like a bad eject.

Probably have better details later in the day. I suspect though that if dead, how they died will likely become quickly irrelevant. All anyone will care about is "you were in my air space!" and "no I wasn't!" The truth won't really matter anymore (to Russians and Turks that is). It already seems like the realities of the Syrian Civil War don't matter to either side. They're just making up whatever facts justify their aims.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

Unless the Russians are still annoyed about that Crimean thing...

 RiTides wrote:

 LethalShade wrote:
Open the box, dammit !

Thank you for that . Good to have a bit of humor in all this...

You're welcome.

Aren't pilots usually armed with a handgun in case they have to eject in enemy territory? Or is this movie fiction?

If they are armed then seem to be fair game for shooing up until the point that they surrender.

 d-usa wrote:
Aren't pilots usually armed with a handgun in case they have to eject in enemy territory? Or is this movie fiction?

If they are armed then seem to be fair game for shooing up until the point that they surrender.

US pilots are armed. Having said that, as I mentioned above, my recollection is ejected air crew are no longer combatants (at least while under canopy on the way down). Once they attempt to E&E instead of surrendering I guess they become combatants again.

 d-usa wrote:
Aren't pilots usually armed with a handgun in case they have to eject in enemy territory? Or is this movie fiction?

If they are armed then seem to be fair game for shooing up until the point that they surrender.

https://www.quora.com/Do-fighter-jet-pilots-carry-guns-in-case-they-have-to-eject-or-land-in-enemy-territory-If-so-what-type-of-guns-do-they-have



+ About the pilots :

https://www.rt.com/news/323237-video-dead-russian-pilot/

 d-usa wrote:
Aren't pilots usually armed with a handgun in case they have to eject in enemy territory? Or is this movie fiction?

If they are armed then seem to be fair game for shooing up until the point that they surrender.

Not exactly easy to surrender when you're dangling from a parachute all high up in the air.

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Aren't pilots usually armed with a handgun in case they have to eject in enemy territory? Or is this movie fiction?

If they are armed then seem to be fair game for shooing up until the point that they surrender.

Not exactly easy to surrender when you're dangling from a parachute all high up in the air.

Even French pilots cannot do that. And we know A LOT about surrendering

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

To which I add, if true, well deserved.

 IGtR= wrote:


The labelling of it as a war crime may be accurate though. Whilst untested through the jurisprudence of the ICC this is classic war crime territory where allegedly unarmed and possibly injured personnel have been killed. It does not seem too much of a stretch to refer to this as a war crime as it fits the criterion we generally use. The morality is entirely separate to the law but the law seems to support the labelling of the behaviour as a potential war crime.

Can a 'war' crime be committed by an armed civilian though? Because that's essentially what these militias are made up of. If I'm parachuting onto Frazzled's back yard, and he shoots me for trespassing, is that a war crime? What's more, If my boss fired a missile that killed five of his neighbours the week before, is it still a war crime? What if Frazzled and his neighbours are collaboratively watching out for people like me who keep killing people? Ultimately, can an armed civilian be expected to adhere to the law of war, and held to the same standards as a conventional state military? And how organised/well armed does a group of civilians have to be before they constitute an equivalent to a state military?


A think an important third point not yet raised here is the act the Russian pilots were engaged in. They were engaged in firing munitions against civilian targets (hence the reason for them being there to get shot down in the first place). Why is it not a war crime when they fire a missile that blows up a house and kills five people, but when their aircraft is destroyed and they bail and get shot by their targets, the populace they were firing at are guilty of war crimes?

I mean, let's be frank here, if it's just a case of firing on defenceless targets(i.e. that cannot fire/fight back) that makes it a war crime, doesn't that make every Russian air strike so far a war crime?

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Why are you speechless? Thats how war works. They try to kill you if they can.

Ask yourself if you would be saying this if it was an American helicopter trying to recover the bodies of American pilots that had just been shot by terrorists.

You mean like in Vietnam? Like Korea? Like Afghanistan? Again, what do you think war is?
Why are they terrorists? They are fighting against a dictator. Your dictator just happens to like their dictator.

I don't like the idea that UK is funding people who would do this. I hope the western countries involved will think about what has happened and sort them out.

Indeed, we need to pass out medals at once. Shooting down a helicopter with an antitank missile takes skill.

Just because it also happened in wars the US was in, doesn't mean it isn't terrible and that it shouldn't happen.

As for why they are terrorists? I don't know, maybe because they use live humans as meat shields?

Why are you saying people that committed a war crime deserve to get a medal? Is it supposed to be funny? You're terribly failing at it, if so.

The pilots are most likely dead - at least one of them is, as confirmed by the video that's been circulating in which the terrorists reportedly regret that they hadn’t burned him on the spot.

I have to say I'm on your side in this. If that pilot is alive and they torture him to death by burning or any other form of atrocity. I would hope Russia goes in and wrecks some serious ass.

 jhe90 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

on any Turkish backed rebels in syria then, there a target. and in syria, Turkey cannot protect them.

If Turkmen kill downed Russian pilots and shoot a Russian helicopter I can see Russia attacking them. They just need to be sure to fly close to but not over the Turkish border, hit a militiary target with a lot of pro-Turkish fighters in it and Turkey will get the message.
Russia has some very heavy ordnance and heavy bombers to carry it. The Tu-160 can carry two 20ton bomb loads, which is possibly enough for large scale thermobaric weapons, though volume rather than mass may be a deciding factor on deployment.
Turkey is rather fond of its Turkmen militias, dropping a FOAB on a camp full of them will let Turkey know the gloves are off.

Relapse wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Why are you speechless? Thats how war works. They try to kill you if they can.

Ask yourself if you would be saying this if it was an American helicopter trying to recover the bodies of American pilots that had just been shot by terrorists.

You mean like in Vietnam? Like Korea? Like Afghanistan? Again, what do you think war is?
Why are they terrorists? They are fighting against a dictator. Your dictator just happens to like their dictator.

I don't like the idea that UK is funding people who would do this. I hope the western countries involved will think about what has happened and sort them out.

Indeed, we need to pass out medals at once. Shooting down a helicopter with an antitank missile takes skill.

Just because it also happened in wars the US was in, doesn't mean it isn't terrible and that it shouldn't happen.

As for why they are terrorists? I don't know, maybe because they use live humans as meat shields?

Why are you saying people that committed a war crime deserve to get a medal? Is it supposed to be funny? You're terribly failing at it, if so.

The pilots are most likely dead - at least one of them is, as confirmed by the video that's been circulating in which the terrorists reportedly regret that they hadn’t burned him on the spot.

I have to say I'm on your side in this. If that pilot is alive and they torture him to death by burning or any other form of atrocity. I would hope Russia goes in and wrecks some serious ass.

Depends on who captured him.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

on any Turkish backed rebels in syria then, there a target. and in syria, Turkey cannot protect them.

If Turkmen kill downed Russian pilots and shoot a Russian helicopter I can see Russia attacking them. They just need to be sure to fly close to but not over the Turkish border, hit a militiary target with a lot of pro-Turkish fighters in it and Turkey will get the message.
Russia has some very heavy ordnance and heavy bombers to carry it. The Tu-160 can carry two 20ton bomb loads, which is possibly enough for large scale thermobaric weapons, though volume rather than mass may be a deciding factor on deployment.
Turkey is rather fond of its Turkmen militias, dropping a FOAB on a camp full of them will let Turkey know the gloves are off.

Unless te Turks shoot the bomber down first.

 Frazzled wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Why are you speechless? Thats how war works. They try to kill you if they can.

Ask yourself if you would be saying this if it was an American helicopter trying to recover the bodies of American pilots that had just been shot by terrorists.

You mean like in Vietnam? Like Korea? Like Afghanistan? Again, what do you think war is?
Why are they terrorists? They are fighting against a dictator. Your dictator just happens to like their dictator.

I don't like the idea that UK is funding people who would do this. I hope the western countries involved will think about what has happened and sort them out.

Indeed, we need to pass out medals at once. Shooting down a helicopter with an antitank missile takes skill.

Just because it also happened in wars the US was in, doesn't mean it isn't terrible and that it shouldn't happen.

As for why they are terrorists? I don't know, maybe because they use live humans as meat shields?

Why are you saying people that committed a war crime deserve to get a medal? Is it supposed to be funny? You're terribly failing at it, if so.

The pilots are most likely dead - at least one of them is, as confirmed by the video that's been circulating in which the terrorists reportedly regret that they hadn’t burned him on the spot.

I have to say I'm on your side in this. If that pilot is alive and they torture him to death by burning or any other form of atrocity. I would hope Russia goes in and wrecks some serious ass.

Depends on who captured him.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

on any Turkish backed rebels in syria then, there a target. and in syria, Turkey cannot protect them.

If Turkmen kill downed Russian pilots and shoot a Russian helicopter I can see Russia attacking them. They just need to be sure to fly close to but not over the Turkish border, hit a militiary target with a lot of pro-Turkish fighters in it and Turkey will get the message.
Russia has some very heavy ordnance and heavy bombers to carry it. The Tu-160 can carry two 20ton bomb loads, which is possibly enough for large scale thermobaric weapons, though volume rather than mass may be a deciding factor on deployment.
Turkey is rather fond of its Turkmen militias, dropping a FOAB on a camp full of them will let Turkey know the gloves are off.

Unless te Turks shoot the bomber down first.

A tu160 would be under a solid escort, there rare in Russian Arsenal, be very pissed to lose a swan.

Any lost, far as I know, little or no replacement

 Frazzled wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 thenoobbomb wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Why are you speechless? Thats how war works. They try to kill you if they can.

Ask yourself if you would be saying this if it was an American helicopter trying to recover the bodies of American pilots that had just been shot by terrorists.

You mean like in Vietnam? Like Korea? Like Afghanistan? Again, what do you think war is?
Why are they terrorists? They are fighting against a dictator. Your dictator just happens to like their dictator.

I don't like the idea that UK is funding people who would do this. I hope the western countries involved will think about what has happened and sort them out.

Indeed, we need to pass out medals at once. Shooting down a helicopter with an antitank missile takes skill.

Just because it also happened in wars the US was in, doesn't mean it isn't terrible and that it shouldn't happen.

As for why they are terrorists? I don't know, maybe because they use live humans as meat shields?

Why are you saying people that committed a war crime deserve to get a medal? Is it supposed to be funny? You're terribly failing at it, if so.

The pilots are most likely dead - at least one of them is, as confirmed by the video that's been circulating in which the terrorists reportedly regret that they hadn’t burned him on the spot.

I have to say I'm on your side in this. If that pilot is alive and they torture him to death by burning or any other form of atrocity. I would hope Russia goes in and wrecks some serious ass.

Depends on who captured him.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Summarily executing prisoners is a war crime.

I am expecting a heavy punitive air raid on the Turkmen.

There's no Russia-Turkey war.

on any Turkish backed rebels in syria then, there a target. and in syria, Turkey cannot protect them.

If Turkmen kill downed Russian pilots and shoot a Russian helicopter I can see Russia attacking them. They just need to be sure to fly close to but not over the Turkish border, hit a militiary target with a lot of pro-Turkish fighters in it and Turkey will get the message.
Russia has some very heavy ordnance and heavy bombers to carry it. The Tu-160 can carry two 20ton bomb loads, which is possibly enough for large scale thermobaric weapons, though volume rather than mass may be a deciding factor on deployment.
Turkey is rather fond of its Turkmen militias, dropping a FOAB on a camp full of them will let Turkey know the gloves are off.

Unless te Turks shoot the bomber down first.

And Russia starts shooting down any Turkish plane over Syria.

Why are you assuming there are Turkish planes over Syria?

 Ketara wrote:

Can a 'war' crime be committed by an armed civilian though? Because that's essentially what these militias are made up of...... Ultimately, can an armed civilian be expected to adhere to the law of war, and held to the same standards as a conventional state military? And how organised/well armed does a group of civilians have to be before they constitute an equivalent to a state military?

A think an important third point not yet raised here is the act the Russian pilots were engaged in. They were engaged in firing munitions against civilian targets .... Why is it not a war crime when they fire a missile that blows up a house and kills five people, but when their aircraft is destroyed and they bail and get shot by their targets, the populace they were firing at are guilty of war crimes?

I mean, let's be frank here, if it's just a case of firing on defenceless targets(i.e. that cannot fire/fight back) that makes it a war crime, doesn't that make every Russian air strike so far a war crime?

To quote from the ICRC Guidelines on war crimes:
"(ii) Perpetrators. Practice in the form of legislation, military manuals and case-law shows that war crimes are violations committed either by members of the armed forces or by civilians against members of the armed forces, civilians or protected objects of the adverse party.[28] National legislation typically does not limit the commission of war crimes to members of the armed forces, but rather indicates the acts that are criminal when committed by any person.[29] Several military manuals contain the same approach.[30] A number of military manuals, as well as some legislation, expressly include the term “civilians” among the persons that can commit war crimes.[31] "

If you want to read more then I can give you the link. Basically there are a certain set of agreed legal norms that are classified legally as war crimes, for example rape, genocide, which are agreed through conventions, treaties and through the case law of the ICC and equivalents to have codified what a war crime is. Russia's actions are legal under their laws of engagement and are targeted at irregular military forces and are not war crimes. They have no relevant provision under international law stating they are war crimes ergo they are not war crimes. The action of shooting at pilots on parachutes is arguably a war crime.

The problem you are having is divorcing morality and your political perspective from the law. You might not like Russian airstrikes, and think they are wrong, but they are not war crimes. I don't like the government taxing me and taking my money but it is not theft, it is legal, and therefore cannot be described as a crime. I hope that has clarified the legal approach somewhat.