Airplane shot down in Colombia

The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.

Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 2007-06-30 21:12:44 -0700, Jay Honeck said:

The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.

Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?

Here we have a thread on the US helping to shoot down a civilian
aircraft, and you ask that question. Remember, too, that a few years
ago the Bush administration asked for funds in the Coast Guard
Reauthorization Act to shoot down suspected drug dealers within the
borders of the US itself.

The Navy has continually threatened to shoot down private aircraft that
violate its security zones or, in the words of our local Navy PR
officer, they may shoot down aircraft who get "too close" to the
security zone. No one knows what "too close" is. Since I live near such
a zone, I am concerned that if the Navy ever does open fire my house
could be showered with spent ordnance and aircraft debris, or even a
stray missile. When I expressed these concerns to the PR officer, he
said that protecting civilians was not the job of the Navy.


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Jay Honeck wrote:
The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.

Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"



I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus......

"Flydive" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.

Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"



I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus......

That was violating several ICAO rules, IIRC.

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Flydive" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.
Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus......

That was violating several ICAO rules, IIRC.


So death penalty then? As the Corean 747, the Russian were right then?
And anyway it was a Civilian Aircraft and it was shot down by the US as
per question.

"Flydive" wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Flydive" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the
Soviet
Union and other rogue states.
Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus......

That was violating several ICAO rules, IIRC.
So death penalty then?


Pardon?

As the Corean 747, the Russian were right then?

There was a battle zone in the area?

And anyway it was a Civilian Aircraft and it was shot down by the US as
per question.

Your sense of omnipotence during battle, especially for aircraft not
following ICAO procedures is bizzare. Your comparison to the KAL 007 is
obscene.

If you're going to make a point, understand the contextual differences and
get that GD agenda back up your spincter.

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Flydive" wrote in message


I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus......
That was violating several ICAO rules, IIRC.
So death penalty then?


Pardon?

Well it seemed like you are justifying shooting down an airliner just
because it is violating ICAO procedures, that sounds a bit like death
penalty.


As the Corean 747, the Russian were right then?

There was a battle zone in the area?

No, but I believe it was heading for some very restricted airspace and
not answering/following ATC instruction. What would happen today
(granted, we are post 9/11) in a similar situation in the USA?


And anyway it was a Civilian Aircraft and it was shot down by the US as
per question.

Your sense of omnipotence during battle, especially for aircraft not
following ICAO procedures is bizzare. Your comparison to the KAL 007 is
obscene.


Sense of Omnipotence? Granted it was an accident, a terrible mistake
that should not have happened, still is a civilian aircraft being shot
down, is the US navy unable to make the difference between an Airbus and
a fighter. Please can you tell what are the ICAO violations that justify
the shooting, or that led to believe that the Airbus was attacking the
fleet?


If you're going to make a point, understand the contextual differences and
get that GD agenda back up your spincter.


GD agenda? please explain, I do not know what it means.

get that GD agenda back up your spincter.


And anyway it is alway nice to have a civil and respectfull
conversation.......

And anyway it is alway nice to have a civil and respectfull
conversation.......

Matt Barrow has difficulty having a civil and respectful
conversation, as does Kontiki...

"Flydive" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.

Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"



I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus.

The Airbus incident was indeed tragic. But, the context was completely
different. The Airbus shoot-down was a horrible mistake involving its
mistaken identity as an immediate threat. This occurred in the vicinity of
ongoing hostilities. The shoot-down of the presumed drug runner was the
intentional stalking and shoot down of a civilian aircraft which posed no
immediate threat.

One question... Was the drug runner shoot-down during daylight hours? You
would think the intelligent drug runner would fly at night when
essentially day, VFR fighters wouldn't be effective.

KB

Kyle Boatright wrote:
"Flydive" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
The United States is signatory to treaties prohibiting firing upon
civilian aircraft, but regularly violates these treaties. This is
behavior that we used to associate with the worst aspects of the Soviet
Union and other rogue states.
Just curious: When has the US ever fired on civilian aircraft?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


I kind of remember something about an Iranian Airbus.

The Airbus incident was indeed tragic. But, the context was completely
different. The Airbus shoot-down was a horrible mistake involving its
mistaken identity as an immediate threat. This occurred in the vicinity of
ongoing hostilities. The shoot-down of the presumed drug runner was the
intentional stalking and shoot down of a civilian aircraft which posed no
immediate threat.

I agree.
Also, maybe the initial part of the tape is missing, so were there
warnings before? And I did not see the normal intercept procedures as
per ICAO




One question... Was the drug runner shoot-down during daylight hours? You
would think the intelligent drug runner would fly at night when
essentially day, VFR fighters wouldn't be effective.

KB