What's new

IRIAF | News and Discussions

nice talk dear

always leave the questions unanswered cause that really helps you in making your point :)

take care mate
Nah its just that this discussion doesnt make sense and the fact that PDF got another update where you cant partially quote anymore, just too lazy to make such an effort for obvious answers. :)

BTW: @Daneshmand welcome.
 
The plane was on a mission over Cyprus and accidentally entered Syrian airspace.


I have no clue why this is relevant.


Im not supporting Erdogans policy about Syria but lets talk about facts, Turkey doesnt need NATO at all against Syria and Assads army is no match it barely survives against rag tags with Iranian and Russian support so pls leave this ridiculous talk.
Erdogan surely wants to remove Assad but not at this cost, another point is that people in Turkey would heavily oppose a war.
I would also like to remind you that Turkey already threatened Syria with war in 90s Where Hafez Assad in return send Apo out of country.

Cyprus invasion was certainly against NATO interest which Turkey got sanctioned for but there are still 30000 Turkish troops on the island with a de-facto independent state.



I will leave the rest unanswered since this sentence alone shows how much sense it makes to have a discussion with you.

Just for the record, there are only three Airforces which can be counted as powerful in ME, you know which one no need to explain it.

1- Accidentally?. I see now. Well, then it follows it. The shoot down was also accidental. Why you are taking it so personally when it was all an accident.

2- Because you brought it in, dear. You said their missile was Russian made. So was your plane.

3- Well, Erdogan's policy has been condemned both inside and outside Turkey. If Turkey does not need NATO, then why Turkey is all the time begging NATO for intervention in Syria. Just jump in and see what happens to your "uber" military.

You do not want to pay the cost for your dreams and strategic vision but you love your dreams so much that some one else should pay for them. Is this what you are saying, because your logic is so twisted. So who should pay this cost in your opinion? NATO that you do not need? Iran? Russia? China? Who exactly? For the love of your dreams.

4- Cyprus situation had nothing to do with NATO. It was blue on blue. In house fighting. The truth is, Turkey can not move a millimeter without first getting permission from Brussels. Syria situation proved this beyond any doubt. And many countries threatened many countries in the course of history. Only few countries succeeded in implementing their strategic visions. We know what group Turkey belongs to. So please, do not push me to spell it out for you.

5- An airforce that can not support a state's strategic planning is only for decoration. Just like jewelry that women wear and take pride in. It has no real function. It is only there to pump some air into immature ego balloons. Nothing more. Just for kids like you to show off on internet forums. A ultra expensive show off.


Thank you Xenon.
 
1- Accidentally?. I see now. Well, then it follows it. The shoot down was also accidental. Why you are taking it so personally when it was all an accident.

2- Because you brought it in, dear. You said their missile was Russian made. So was your plane.

3- Well, Erdogan's policy has been condemned both inside and outside Turkey. If Turkey does not need NATO, then why Turkey is all the time begging NATO for intervention in Syria. Just jump in and see what happens to your "uber" military.

You do not want to pay the cost for your dreams and strategic vision but you love your dreams so much that some one else should pay for them. Is this what you are saying, because your logic is so twisted. So who should pay this cost in your opinion? NATO that you do not need? Iran? Russia? China? Who exactly? For the love of your dreams.

4- Cyprus situation had nothing to do with NATO. It was blue on blue. In house fighting. The truth is, Turkey can not move a millimeter without first getting permission from Brussels. Syria situation proved this beyond any doubt. And many countries threatened many countries in the course of history. Only few countries succeeded in implementing their strategic visions. We know what group Turkey belongs to. So please, do not push me to spell it out for you.

5- An airforce that can not support a state's strategic planning is only for decoration. Just like jewelry that women wear and take pride in. It has no real function. It is only there to pump some air into immature ego balloons. Nothing more. Just for kids like you to show off on internet forums. A ultra expensive show off.
1. Tit for Tat its that easy, its not unusual that aircrafts violate airspaces but shooting down without warning on the other hand is.

2. I pointed out that the missile came probably from a Russian base in Syria, the origin of Hardware is irrelevant.

3. Already explained it here.

Im not supporting Erdogans policy about Syria but lets talk about facts, Turkey doesnt need NATO at all against Syria and Assads army is no match it barely survives against rag tags with Iranian and Russian support so pls leave this ridiculous talk.
Erdogan surely wants to remove Assad but not at this cost, another point is that people in Turkey would heavily oppose a war.
I would also like to remind you that Turkey already threatened Syria with war in 90s Where Hafez Assad in return send Apo out of country.

Source: IRAF operation against ISIS | Page 4

4. And thats why Turkey got sanctioned by west? Spell out whatever you think im curious.

5. Now your starting with name callings, Syria also thought our Airforce was just a decoration with fatal results.
 
Xenon,

1- Well, this is due to a technical issue. The new Russian AD systems use artificial intelligence and are completely automated. They just send a brief radio transmission to the pilot in Russian "готовы?" and then launch their missiles. :sarcastic:

2- It is my understanding that the Turkish aircraft had also come from a NATO base, much like the case of the Syrian missile from a Russian base.

3- Already explained.

4- Yes, not sanctioned actually. Turkish Central Bank was not black listed or any such thing. Just some NATO aid was delayed for a while. When you fight with your buddy who pays and loans you money for your lifestyle then it is all natural for your buddy to slap you on the wrist.

5- There is no name calling here. Only factual discussion. Turkey also thought Syrian AD to be a decoration with devastating results. It cuts both ways. But the question remains, what Turkey achieved strategically with its air force?
 
1. Well it is what it is, noone needs to whine about the consequences then.

2. The jet came from a Turkish base piloted by a Turkish pilot.

4. Also selling of military hardware was sactioned.

5. Calling someone a little kid who you barely know is name calling in my opinion.

And what do you think what Airforce is for, to bomb the country you dont like? A Airforce is more for the defence of your Airspace except your a Superpower like US but for country in size of ours it isnt the case, economic and political power is much more important for a strategic prevalence, thats why US is sanctioning Iran and EU - Russia, booth countrys feel the pain of embargos which is much more effective than a actual war.
 
1- he for sure has more brain than u
:lol: No one with brain become
2-you're right since they probably don't like losing yet another plane to a foreign force in the past couple of years :\
There are several reasons:

First as the saying goes, a machine is only as capable as its operator. Can Turkish pilots stand up for the job? Or will they be beaten up on their streets as has been recently reported that Turkish F-16 pilots are being beaten up on the streets of Turkey by Arab diplomats (for example one Turkish F-16 pilot who is actually the Son-in -law of Turkish Chief of Airforce was reported to have his nose broken by a Kuwaiti diplomat on a Turkish street in front of his wife, therefore losing his flying status).

Secondly an F-4 despite its age, can carry much bigger a bomb load than an F-16. For a ground run mission, bomb load is more important than aerial maneuverability in ground missions.

Thirdly, F-16 is a single engine aircraft. A mechanical failure above enemy territory will cause a huge embarrassment for mission planners as they lose an aircraft and will have to deal now with a captured pilot. F-4 has two engines and therefore, there is less of such a probability.

Fourth, you have to achieve your strategic goals using the tools available. F-16 is not available to Iran, but Iran has been able to achieve its strategic goals by using F-4's. Has Turkey been able to achieve its strategic goals using its F-16's? The answer is clear.
It seems that being stupid, having zero knowledge and being a troll is in the DNA of some specific people.
bunch of garbages and made up stories, but have you ever tried to think if phantom is better than f16 in targetting ground targets, and reliability, why they designed f-16? Do you think US air force engineers are as stupid as you?
phantom was good for her era which is half a century ago, but no sane person would choose it over any 4th generation fighter for attacking ground targets.
 
It seems that being stupid, having zero knowledge and being a troll is in the DNA of some specific people.
bunch of garbages and made up stories, but have you ever tried to think if phantom is better than f16 in targetting ground targets, and reliability, why they designed f-16? Do you think US air force engineers are as stupid as you?
phantom was good for her era which is half a century ago, but no sane person would choose it over any 4th generation fighter for attacking ground targets.

The only one who is stupid is you and your DNA. The reason F-16 was designed was not reliability nor attacking ground targets. F-16 came out of a fierce philosophical debate about air to air combat within Pentagon bureaucracy during 1960's. A group of people spearheaded by a talented fighter pilot/engineer by the name of John Boyd who had developed the energy–maneuverability theory (E-M theory), convinced the Pentagon to develop two fighter designs based on his theory of air to air combat. The expensive design became known as F-15 and the cheaper design became F-16. It had nothing to do with ground missions. Your ignorance is really pathetic. F-4 carries more ammo and its twin engine design makes it ideal for such missions where no air to air combat is likely to occur.
 
Last edited:
1. Well it is what it is, noone needs to whine about the consequences then.

2. The jet came from a Turkish base piloted by a Turkish pilot.

4. Also selling of military hardware was sactioned.

5. Calling someone a little kid who you barely know is name calling in my opinion.

And what do you think what Airforce is for, to bomb the country you dont like? A Airforce is more for the defence of your Airspace except your a Superpower like US but for country in size of ours it isnt the case, economic and political power is much more important for a strategic prevalence, thats why US is sanctioning Iran and EU - Russia, booth countrys feel the pain of embargos which is much more effective than a actual war.

1- That is right. Turkey should not have made a big deal out of it by going to Brussels and begging for NATO AD to be placed on Turkey in order to protect Turkey against Syrian AF and BM.

2- The missile came from a Syrian base operated by a Syrian soldier.

4- My dear. Was the slap on the wrist so hard? Is it still burning? What did Turkey do to punish NATO for such a harsh slap on the wrist? Did Turkey leave NATO and started a nuclear program in tandem with a ballistic missile program?

5- Kid is actually a cool name in my dictionary but if you do not like it, then I sincerely apologize.

The air force is there not to bomb another nation but to protect a nation strategically and if that air force is a good air force then project strategic vision of the state beyond the borders. Yes, a super power like US is doing that, no doubt. But so is Iranian air force. But Turkish air force has proved to be at best a tactical one and at worst just a decoration. And it is good to see you are conceding on this point.

As for political and economic power, will you explain to us here what Turkey achieved economically or politically out of its policies regarding Syria? Turkey spent almost all of its political capital on this issue and got nothing in return. Economically Turkey will have to deal with a war ravaged country on its border and millions of refugees for decades to come. In fact lots of Turkish analysts already have warned that Turkey is on its way to become Pakistanized, referring to Pakistan's role in Afghanistan and the disastrous effects that policy has had on Pakistan. As for sanctions on Iran, it is too soon to count your chickens. Let's see who will budge in the end.

You are another fool. F-15 very well serves for air superiority missions, while F-16 is very good at attacking ground targets, but it is obviously not as good as F-15 in air to air combat. Next time you wanted to write some garbage, make sure to write it only for your fool fellows, not for non-Iranians.

You are the only fool here. You have no idea about the philosophy behind the creation of these two aircrafts. The F-16 was designed as a cheap air to air combat jet in order to keep numerical superiority while F-15 was supposed to be the the "uber" of air to air combat while produced in smaller numbers, thus giving US both numerical as well as quality advantage over Soviets with economy in mind.
 
You are the only fool here. You have no idea about the philosophy behind the creation of these two aircrafts. The F-16 was designed as a cheap air to air combat jet in order to keep numerical superiority while F-15 was supposed to be the the "uber" of air to air combat while produced in smaller numbers, thus giving US both numerical as well as quality advantage over Soviets with economy in mind.

:lol:
Another fool who thinks phantom is better than F-16 :lol:
I just wasted my time on you.
 
:lol:
Another fool who thinks phantom is better than F-16 :lol:
I just wasted my time on you.

Yes, for such ground missions that Iran is conducing right now indeed F-4 is better since its twin engine design protects it against unfortunate engine failures and its capability to carry much more bombs and ammo than F-16 means more firepower can be delivered. By the way as I told in my first reply to you, a machine is only as capable as its operator, in this case a pilot. I am not sure, Turkish pilots can handle such missions whether in support of Isis or against them, as the situation on the ground has proved. So your point is moot. Even if Turkey had F-15E, it still could not use it to its strategic advantage. Since the Turkish air force is not a strategic force, it is just a decoration. A box of jewelry. Nothing more. Meanwhile IRIAF will continue to implement Iran's strategic plans in the region, while Turkish air force can play with its toys such as F-16.
 
1- That is right. Turkey should not have made a big deal out of it by going to Brussels and begging for NATO AD to be placed on Turkey in order to protect Turkey against Syrian AF and BM.

2- The missile came from a Syrian base operated by a Syrian soldier.

4- My dear. Was the slap on the wrist so hard? Is it still burning? What did Turkey do to punish NATO for such a harsh slap on the wrist? Did Turkey leave NATO and started a nuclear program in tandem with a ballistic missile program?

5- Kid is actually a cool name in my dictionary but if you do not like it, then I sincerely apologize.

The air force is there not to bomb another nation but to protect a nation strategically and if that air force is a good air force then project strategic vision of the state beyond the borders. Yes, a super power like US is doing that, no doubt. But so is Iranian air force. But Turkish air force has proved to be at best a tactical one and at worst just a decoration. And it is good to see you are conceding on this point.

As for political and economic power, will you explain to us here what Turkey achieved economically or politically out of its policies regarding Syria? Turkey spent almost all of its political capital on this issue and got nothing in return. Economically Turkey will have to deal with a war ravaged country on its border and millions of refugees for decades to come. In fact lots of Turkish analysts already have warned that Turkey is on its way to become Pakistanized, referring to Pakistan's role in Afghanistan and the disastrous effects that policy has had on Pakistan. As for sanctions on Iran, it is too soon to count your chickens. Let's see who will budge in the end.



You are the only fool here. You have no idea about the philosophy behind the creation of these two aircrafts. The F-16 was designed as a cheap air to air combat jet in order to keep numerical superiority while F-15 was supposed to be the the "uber" of air to air combat while produced in smaller numbers, thus giving US both numerical as well as quality advantage over Soviets with economy in mind.
1. I believe the Nato AD is more connected to T-Loramids tender rather than a real treat from Syria.

4. Why schould Turkey punish Nato?

5. Did you just compare Iranian Airforce to US airforce with its international missions? Let me tell you something, only because Iraq allowed Iran to bomb target doesnt mean your airforce is somehow special.

You asked what Turkish airforce is doing to protect our interests, well Turkey was bombing pkk camps in north Iraq since years, nothing special at all.

I know where this is going, im sure you also believe Iran has the best airforce in ME.
 
Back
Top Bottom