As we all know, the Korean airliner was shot down over the coast of (then) Soviet Russia, by a Russian fighter plane. The Russians were on edge, because the US Airforce had been conducting intelligence overflights, some of them crossing into Russian airspace. Most likely, the russians thought they were shooting down a military plane; only later did they learn that they had shot doen a civilian airliner. My question: does the USA bear some of the blame for this?
No.
No.
-XT
No. No. And no again.
That was the classic tension inspired SNAFU.
In the same way the US (I initially wrote “we” before I remembered our increasingly international readership) SNAFUed when we mistakenly shot down the Iranian Airlines plane back around 1988.
Can’t blame Iran for that.
And, when I think of international members and lurkers, I guess I should explain–Situation Normal All Fucked Up.
Snafu.
So nobody here thinks that it is possible that someone sent that plane off course deliberately to either spy or get shot down to ramp up tensions? There are plenty of sickos who were in our government in the 1980s who gained politically and monetarily from high tensions. These “snafus” make a lot of money and power for people. Always the same people.
Thank goodness all of those 1980s sickos are gone, and the people in the same governmental positions now (in 2009) are good, decent, wholesome folks who care about all of us and will always Do the Right Thing.
They wield the same type of power, of course, as those people from the 1980s. But the people in those positions today will use it for Good. Not Evil. As well as act in all of our best interests. I’m so glad. I sleep so much better at night knowing that.
All you have to do is name names, if you got’em. Lunacy.
Got any names?
You think that somebody in the US government would use a civilian 747 owned by a private foreign company and that had a US Congressman on board as a spyplane? It seems unlikely.
You think they could have kept it a secret? :dubious:
- so yeah, I admit it was just barely conceivable, but they would have spilled the beans by now. I mean, look at the CIA’s record.
As I recall, one of the pilots reported that it was a civilian plane - he could see the rows of cabin lights on the fuselage. He also reported that the plane was flashing its strobes and nav lights - something a spy plane doesn’t exactly do. He was ordered to shoot it down anyway. The Soviets then hindered rescue operations to make sure they got to the crash site first, and they confiscated the flight data recorders and refused to release them.
The Soviet Union gets 100% of the blame for the tragedy.
Of course not. Looks like I needed to crank the sarcasm meter up another notch.
Samclem is being generous.
I disagree. The pilot said more than that (which you conveniently withhold). He said it made no difference whether it was a civilian plane because civilian planes could be and were outfitted for spying ops. So when he said that he believed it was a civilian plane he was referring to the type of plane, not to the fact that it was full of inoccent passengers as you seem to imply.
The soviets believed planes of different types were conducting spying ops and the reason for this was that American planes really were conducting spying ops.
Besides the notion that it was and remained off course innocenty by such a huge distance is just difficult to believe. Come on.
America shot an airliner some thousands of miles away from its territory while the soviets shot an airliner over their own territory. Over their own territory.
So, if we believe both incidents were innocent mistakes due to the tensions of the cold war then both sides which were creating that tension were to blame for creating the conditions which resulted in those mistakes happening.
If we believe there was foul play then I am more inclined to believe KAL007 was not innocently there when it was shot down.
The International Civil Aviation Organization does not find it difficult.
Of course, they did some actual analysis.
Cite.
If the thread goes into grassy knoll mode, then forget it.
Regards,
Shodan
No.
I don’t know if it’s been linked to in the thread yet, but here is the Wiki article on it (scroll down and you can see the actual flight path vs what was flown and the most likely reason for the difference…well, unless you are a Soviet or CTer). For those of you who think that this was some kind of plot by the US to over fly one of the Soviet held Japanese islands (gods know why we would do that, but what the hey), my question, to paraphrase Bill Murray in Ground Hog Day: Was it snowing in space? This was 1983 guys…not 1953. Even leaving aside that SR-71 thingy we had, there were those satellites, ehe? We didn’t NEED to have a civilian air liner (flagged for another country) to do our spying for us. Occam and all that…
-XT
(Clue) “Too Late!”
It is not like the Soviets did not have good reason to be suspicious. The USA has a long history of flying close to or into airspaces just to see what responses were triggered. So, no, it is not inconceivable.
The notion that the Soviets blew a civilian airliner out of the air just for the heck of it is silly. It is what America tried to claim but it is just silly.