So another commercial plane shot down
- Thread starter Dungeon Master
- Start date
There's no proof it was "shot down" (yet) but in general it would be a good idea to stop flying over freaking war zones. The Sinai is essentially a smaller version of Syria/western Iraq right now; the Egyptians have the entire military operating in the area fighting ISIS militia. A band of Mexican tourists were smoked by an Egyptian Apache a few weeks ago by mistake.
Also, Russian airlines are absolute shit. You should never fly them aside from maybe Aeroflot. Most of them are banned from operating in Europe due to lack of safety and maintenance standards and a lot of the smaller airlines are Russian mob owned- they don't have to play by the safety standard rules.
Also, Russian airlines are absolute shit. You should never fly them aside from maybe Aeroflot. Most of them are banned from operating in Europe due to lack of safety and maintenance standards and a lot of the smaller airlines are Russian mob owned- they don't have to play by the safety standard rules.
Well, US and UK offiicals think it was an ISIS bomb that brought this down.
Wow.
This is major. If ISIS can get a bomb onto an aircraft then they're a legit global threat.
Wow.
This is major. If ISIS can get a bomb onto an aircraft then they're a legit global threat.
I don't know that I'd go that far yet. Look at where the plane originated. No doubt that someone or someones at the airport had something to do with this. If guys at JFK and Hartsfield (did I do that correctly, @USFSucks ?) can smuggle guns, then I wouldn't put it past a couple of guys in Egypt to be able to get a bomb onto a plane. Replicable globally? Sure, in some places. But I would still feel comfortable with air travel over 90% of the world.
Sharm el Sheikh is "the" tourist and luxury spot in Egypt. It's the prized area of the country and easily the biggest tourist destination outside of the pyramids. The airport is first class, extremely modern, and the Army had a massive focus on the area to assure it stayed safe to keep the tourists coming.
It's not like these people boarded a plane actually in the Sinai.
Sure this is easier to do there than in the West, but it still shows a high level of cooperation and influence.
Hell there's a Four Seasons 10 minutes from the airport.
I'm not sure where you get your info or how much training you have to analyze your information, but the British, who have nothing to do with this attack, and every economic reason to stay on Egypt's good side, just grounded all British tourists because of the shocking lack of security at what you call a first class airport. We know from the Bojinka plot, which is basically this same scenario except in the Phillipines, that a cell of three or four people can carry this out if well funded.
It's pretty obvious it's ethnic Chechens hired by Daesh (what Americans mistakenly call ISIS or ISIL). They could blend in as Russian tourists easily and get through lapsed security protocols or with help of sympathizers at the airport.
Take the time to learn what you are looking at, so you aren't learning about it in the paper. Test your own analysis skills against journalistic reporting. Within seconds of the press coverage of the Boston bombers I could tell you they should be looking for ethnic Chechens when the bomb went off underneath the Russian flag on the finish route. It's got the same signature here. They are trying to bring Putin in deeper after committing assets in Syria. The nonsense about missing antiaircraft missiles is misinformation put out by those that can profit from an arms buildup in the region. It's much more likely something very simple like a Bojinka bomb and we just keep making the same mistakes.
lol
Ok, dude. I was in Egypt 6 months ago training Egyptian MOI units, and it was stated, in no uncertain terms, that Sharm El Sheikh is the absolute last hope for Egyptian tourism and they intended to secure the shit out of the area. That airport had the highest level of security in the country and it was outfitted by the best western ISR companies.
Did they use a Chechnyan? Who knows? And who cares? In the end, the result is the same: extremists somehow got a bomb onto a plane despite very tight security in the airport.
Ok, dude. I was in Egypt 6 months ago training Egyptian MOI units, and it was stated, in no uncertain terms, that Sharm El Sheikh is the absolute last hope for Egyptian tourism and they intended to secure the shit out of the area. That airport had the highest level of security in the country and it was outfitted by the best western ISR companies.
Did they use a Chechnyan? Who knows? And who cares? In the end, the result is the same: extremists somehow got a bomb onto a plane despite very tight security in the airport.
Hahaha.
We normally agree on a lot, but you are far too intelligent to be believing what you are saying here. I'm sorry you believe(d) the ramblings of Baghdad Bob's cousin Sharm Sam, but people with just casual knowledge of counter terrorist issues, airport security techniques, and the like have been publicly disagreeing with that line of bunk. The last audit by US and UK officials found significant problems, but the facility made international standards. what that means is that basic security measures we take for granted but are considered cumbersome, expensive, or culturally unnecessary are not followed in low risk areas. For instance, it was known in advance that airport personnel and the screeners themselves are not required to go through security screening prior to working in controlled areas. This is basic stuff since the 80s.
I'm not sure who you thought was working there, but this couple isn't the only one out there on the net telling similar stories.
http://news.sky.com/story/1582608/airport-security-britons-paid-20-to-skip-checks
We normally agree on a lot, but you are far too intelligent to be believing what you are saying here. I'm sorry you believe(d) the ramblings of Baghdad Bob's cousin Sharm Sam, but people with just casual knowledge of counter terrorist issues, airport security techniques, and the like have been publicly disagreeing with that line of bunk. The last audit by US and UK officials found significant problems, but the facility made international standards. what that means is that basic security measures we take for granted but are considered cumbersome, expensive, or culturally unnecessary are not followed in low risk areas. For instance, it was known in advance that airport personnel and the screeners themselves are not required to go through security screening prior to working in controlled areas. This is basic stuff since the 80s.
I'm not sure who you thought was working there, but this couple isn't the only one out there on the net telling similar stories.
http://news.sky.com/story/1582608/airport-security-britons-paid-20-to-skip-checks
