IS shoots down warplane in Syria, captures Jordanian pilot

[Lite Beer]

IS shoots down warplane in Syria, captures Jordanian pilot

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — The Islamic State group captured a Jordanian pilot after shooting down his warplane over Syria, Jordan said Wednesday, in the extremists' first successful downing of an aircraft from the international coalition waging an air campaign against the extremists.

The show of the extremists' capabilities underscored the risks for the United States and the multiple Arab and European countries whose warplanes are participating in bombing campaign aimed at pushing back the jihadis' control across much of Syria and Iraq. It also posed Jordan with a nightmare scenario — its pilot was the first foreign soldier to fall into the extremists' hands.

It was not immediately known how the fighters shot down the warplane. But the Islamic State group is known to have stocks of Russian-made Igla anti-aircraft missiles. The shoulder-fired weapon has long been in the Syrian and Iraqi government arsenals — it was used during the 1991 Gulf War by Iraqi forces to down a British Tornado jet, for example. More recently, militants in Chechnya have used them to down Russian helicopters.

Jordanian Information Minister Mohammad Momani told The Associated Press that the plane was shot down by "ground fire" but did not elaborate.

Activists monitoring the conflict said Islamic State group fighters shot down the warplane near the northern Syrian city of Raqqa, the group's de facto capital.

The Raqqa Media Center published a photograph said to be of the pilot — in a white shirt, naked from the waist down and sopping wet — being pulled by gunmen out of what appeared to be a lake. Another picture shows him surrounded by more than a dozen fighters, some of them masked. The center said IS fighters are scouring the area in case there is a second pilot.

The United States and several Arab allies have been striking the Islamic State group in Syria since Sept. 23, and U.S. and other international warplanes have been waging an air campaign against the extremists in Iraq for even longer. The campaign aims to push back the jihadi organization after it took over much of Iraq and Syria and declared a "caliphate."

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates are participating in the Syria strikes, with Qatari logistical support.

The pilot's capture raises a nightmare scenario for Jordan, which has been sharply criticized by militant sympathizers for its participation. IS in the past has beheaded dozens of Syrian soldiers it captured in operations around the country. The group has also beheaded three Americans and two Britons.

Moman, the informational minister, vowed that "the war on terrorism will continue," saying, the fight with the extremists was "to defend the Islamic religion."

Jordan's military said in a statement that as its air force was carrying out a military mission against the Islamic State group Wednesday morning, "one of our warplanes crashed," it said. "The pilot was taken hostage by the Daesh terrorist organization," it added, using the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State group.

It said IS and "those who support it" will be responsible for the safety of the pilot. It did not give the cause of the crash or identify the type of aircraft.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said it had confirmation from activists on the ground that the aircraft was shot down, either by a Russian-made anti-aircraft missile or by heavy machinegun fire.

The Raqqa Media Center, an agency of activists that operates openly in IS-ruled areas with permission of the group, said the plane was downed near the village of Hamra Ghannam outside Raqqa. It posted photos of militants posing with shards of wreckage. It also posted a photo of the pilot's military identification card, identifying him as Mu'ath Safi Yousef al-Kaseasbeh.

The group later showed the plane's glass canopy that was taken to a Raqqa main square where it was placed on the pavement for people to watch.

In Jordan, the pilot's cousin Marwan al-Kaseasbeh confirmed by telephone with The Associated Press that the photos are of his cousin.

Momani, the information minister, identified al-Kaseasbeh by name saying "he is a symbol of heroism and sacrifice."

Activists say the Islamic State group is widely known to have Igla missile systems, either captured or bought from rival Syrian rebels, who were provided them by international patrons or bought them on the international market. State arsenals in both Iraq and Syria have been looted, so that could also be a source of Iglas circulating among rebels.

Asaad Kanjo, an activist based in the northwestern province of Idlib, said IS is believed to have acquired the Igla missiles by buying them from mainstream rebel commanders or after some opposition fighters defected and joined the jihadi group.

In Washington, a Pentagon official said they are aware of the claims being made over social media that a pilot has been shot down, but they could not confirm the report at this time. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the reports by name.

Also Wednesday, a suicide bomber infiltrated a group of pro-government Sunni militiamen at a military base south of Baghdad as they gathered to get their paychecks. The bomber detonated his explosives, killing at least 24 militiamen and soldiers and wounding 55 others, police said.

The Sunni militias, known as Sahwa or Awakening Councils, were formed at the height of Iraq's sectarian fighting in 2006 and 2007, and allied with U.S. troops against al-Qaida in Iraq, a precursor to the Islamic State extremist group. They are viewed as traitors by Sunni extremists fighting to overthrow the Shiite-led government.

In another attack, four civilians were killed and seven wounded when a bomb tore through an outdoor market in the town of Youssifiyah, 20 kilometers (12 miles) south of Baghdad. Both bombings bore the hallmarks of the Islamic State group.

-- (c) Associated Press 2014012-24

[Lissos]

Official Muslim doctrine about suicide may complicate matters with this suggestion, but I reckon that part of an ejection kit for fighter pilots in that part of the world right now should include a cyanide tablet because this man's fate is probably going to be fairly predictable, involving a knife, a video camera and screams of Allah Akbar! Failing that, the means to detonate explosives on the approach of enemy who have located you after ejection. If your'e going to go out, maybe it is better go out taking out a few of these apes in the process. In Afghanistan there was a known case of an insurgent faked being an injured civilian, where upon a British medic approached him to offer assistance and the false casualty detonated a suicide vest and killed them all. Two can play at that game.

[Jay Sata]

It is pretty sad that the high tech forces are once again with their backs to the wall.

The combined forces in Afghanistan complete with the USA and the CIA failed.

The same in Iraq.

It appears a few guys capture strategic key positions and over run the trained forces and use their weapons to then send the

so called trained militia running.

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

In my opinion nothing and I would be asking the military suppliers to hand back my cash.

Around a thousand years from the crusades and we are still on the losing side.

And where is Israel when you need them?

Well they never wade in to battle opponents they cannot beat.

However the nasties in IS are nothing we have seen before and need wiping out.

Who will do the job?

[oldsailor35]

He is going to die whatever, and probably by beheading. So just get in there and carpet bomb the area, kill as many of the evil bastards as possible.

[Bwanatickey]

Not enough information, as usual we are fed bits.

[NeverSure]

It is pretty sad that the high tech forces are once again with their backs to the wall.

The combined forces in Afghanistan complete with the USA and the CIA failed.

The same in Iraq.

It appears a few guys capture strategic key positions and over run the trained forces and use their weapons to then send the

so called trained militia running.

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

In my opinion nothing and I would be asking the military suppliers to hand back my cash.

Around a thousand years from the crusades and we are still on the losing side.

And where is Israel when you need them?

Well they never wade in to battle opponents they cannot beat.

However the nasties in IS are nothing we have seen before and need wiping out.

Who will do the job?

Other sources say they shot down an F-16. That's hardly high tech anymore and shouldn't be used in that fashion. It still has it's purpose but it appears to have been shot down by old technology.

While I'm sure that the allies appreciate Jordan's efforts, that should have been a drone above the height the missile could reach and lacking a pilot, or a stealth fighter that they wouldn't see in time to lock onto it, or a B-1 stealth bomber far above what they could reach.

I agree with oldsailor. They're going to torture and then kill the pilot anyway, so carpet bomb them and wipe out the lot of them in the area. If I was the pilot I'd welcome it.

Edited December 24, 2014 by NeverSure

[Kooweerup]

Islamic State did not shoot down Jordan plane, says US.

The Jordanian plane that crashed in Syria was not shot down by Islamic State (IS) militants, the US says.

The plane was lost in IS territory on Wednesday morning, and the pilot has been captured.

IS militants said that they shot down the plane with a heat-seeking missile. However, the US says "evidence clearly indicates" that this is not true.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-30600500

[Lissos]

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

Quite a lot, I would say.

It gives you the ability to carry out reconnaissance safely and also carry out specific military actions immediately or later in areas of very difficult terrain and highly dangerous areas that could take ages to reach on foot or other land means. It means avoiding having to risk putting ground troops into what could end up as a turkey shoot if they don't know the land like the locals. Can it eradicate an enemy entirely without causing surrounding damage or other casualties? No, but having spent an hour sitting down at village meeting with local tribal leaders cannot determine 00% who they are actually loyal to, either. In itself that has been the criticism of drones, that these birds eye judgements could get it wrong and end up bombing what people on the ground later claim was nothing but an innocent wedding event or a school (in the middle east though, a school isn't just for education, nor are hospitals just for treatment, nor mosques exclusively for worship, nor are UN buildings entirely neutral). Once fighters burrow into urban settings, the certainty to be able to safely isolate and pluck out an enemy 'only' in a room, probably vanishes with the current level of technology. It is something that Israel knows only too well. Enemy of course hope to impose such a paralysis by burrowing in like that, gambling that four walls will be a haven.

[MaxYakov]

He is going to die whatever, and probably by beheading. So just get in there and carpet bomb the area, kill as many of the evil bastards as possible.

Naaah. They'd probably find some insidious use for the carpets. Don't need cyanide capsules, simply don't eject. Maybe a fatally-damaged plane could be aimed at a target. Any bets on what these pilots are thinking?

Edited December 25, 2014 by MaxYakov

[slipperylobster]

Not enough information, as usual we are fed bits.

The 'coalition' aren't doing much imo....maybe it's intentional.

I can't believe shitloads of planes and drones can't pick up the black flag pickups and dispatch them.

It's just a few thousand fighters <deleted>.

Reminds me of the Spartans...only needed a few thousand. When you are convinced you are fighting for a God, what is there to fear? Numbers are meaningless...as is technology. Just pull out the plug.....it is called warfare. How do you win on our terms...? The answer is obvious. Fighting on their terms....the only way they have a chance.

I am actually shaking in my boots. I fear for the worst.

[cookee68]

It is pretty sad that the high tech forces are once again with their backs to the wall.

The combined forces in Afghanistan complete with the USA and the CIA failed.

The same in Iraq.

It appears a few guys capture strategic key positions and over run the trained forces and use their weapons to then send the

so called trained militia running.

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

In my opinion nothing and I would be asking the military suppliers to hand back my cash.

Around a thousand years from the crusades and we are still on the losing side.

And where is Israel when you need them?

Well they never wade in to battle opponents they cannot beat.

However the nasties in IS are nothing we have seen before and need wiping out.

Who will do the job?

Other sources say they shot down an F-16. That's hardly high tech anymore and shouldn't be used in that fashion. It still has it's purpose but it appears to have been shot down by old technology.

While I'm sure that the allies appreciate Jordan's efforts, that should have been a drone above the height the missile could reach and lacking a pilot, or a stealth fighter that they wouldn't see in time to lock onto it, or a B-1 stealth bomber far above what they could reach.

I agree with oldsailor. They're going to torture and then kill the pilot anyway, so carpet bomb them and wipe out the lot of them in the area. If I was the pilot I'd welcome it.

me too

[Morch]

It is pretty sad that the high tech forces are once again with their backs to the wall.

The combined forces in Afghanistan complete with the USA and the CIA failed.

The same in Iraq.

It appears a few guys capture strategic key positions and over run the trained forces and use their weapons to then send the

so called trained militia running.

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

In my opinion nothing and I would be asking the military suppliers to hand back my cash.

Around a thousand years from the crusades and we are still on the losing side.

And where is Israel when you need them?

Well they never wade in to battle opponents they cannot beat.

However the nasties in IS are nothing we have seen before and need wiping out.

Who will do the job?

How is one downed aircraft and captured pilot amount to "backs to the wall"?

Was there any change in operations, resolve or tactics by the coalition forces as a result?

Attributing success or failure is more to do with objectives. There were no promises made that fighting IS would be easy, casualty free or that achievements would be swift. Unless mistaken, the same holds for other examples. There were no claims that possessing superior technology and military might guaranteed immediate positive decisive results.

Western forces in Afghanistan and Iraq were not defeated, were not routed. Withdrawal is not quite the same as retreat, Given that Western decision making is influenced by more than simple military considerations, the issues do not always lend themselves to simple military analysis. The "losing side" perception has more to do with the ways wars were fought in the past - all out and without many restrictive rules. Most current instances of modern warfare do not exhibit the same, hence making victory claims (and total lose ones, as well) harder to demonstrate.

Direct participation of Israel in the coalition was, correctly, deemed as politically problematic with some of the countries involved. Pretty sure Israeli Intel agencies are cooperating with their relevant counterparts. While IS does not, at present, pose a direct threat to Israel - it can be counted upon that action would be taken if (or rather, when) things change. This might happen earlier than expected, if reports regarding certain Syrian rebel groups in the vicinity of the border switching their alliance to IS are to be proved true.

IS will be defeated, sort of, sometime in in the not too long future. The odds are stacked against them to a degree where short of divine intervention (but that would sort of make their point anyway) their prospects of holding on to their present achievements are not that great. This does not mean things will end anytime soon, or that they will end in any decisive manner, nor does it guarantee that things in the Middle East would return to the way they were prior to IS.

[Morch]

He is going to die whatever, and probably by beheading. So just get in there and carpet bomb the area, kill as many of the evil bastards as possible.

Well, the pilot and his family might have other thoughts on this. Even in the face of certain death, people still find hope.

Carpet bombing which area? Not sure there was a way to actually carpet bomb the area where the aircraft was downed/crashed, or that it would necessarily have saved him. Carpet bombing the town he is (possibly) held in would probably result in massive civilian casualties.

[Morch]

Not enough information, as usual we are fed bits.

The 'coalition' aren't doing much imo....maybe it's intentional.

I can't believe shitloads of planes and drones can't pick up the black flag pickups and dispatch them.

It's just a few thousand fighters <deleted>.

Are there that many aircraft taking direct part in coalition operations? How do numbers compare with GW1/GW2? The pickup convoys were dropped pretty quickly as IS adjusted their tactics. More than "just a few thousands" by any account, and spread over a rather large area, often embedded among civilians. Not that easy to hit, not that easy to avoid massive civilian casualties, Air strikes will not "win" this, but they account for low casualty figures among coalition forces.

[Morch]

Not enough information, as usual we are fed bits.

The 'coalition' aren't doing much imo....maybe it's intentional.

I can't believe shitloads of planes and drones can't pick up the black flag pickups and dispatch them.

It's just a few thousand fighters <deleted>.

Reminds me of the Spartans...only needed a few thousand. When you are convinced you are fighting for a God, what is there to fear? Numbers are meaningless...as is technology. Just pull out the plug.....it is called warfare. How do you win on our terms...? The answer is obvious. Fighting on their terms....the only way they have a chance.

I am actually shaking in my boots. I fear for the worst.

Any mediocre modern day air-force would have cleared the Spartans out the Thermopylae pass in short order - have no illusions about that. As it was, they lasted about three days, if memory serves.

[Morch]

Syria Isis news: US Special Forces mission to rescue Jordanian pilot fails amid intense fighting

Two attempted rescue missions to save hostages held by Islamic State (Isis) in Syria ended in failure last night, according to reports.

The failed operations took place in the self-proclaimed IS capital city of Raqqa on 1 January. The target was to retrieve a number of hostages including Muadh al-Kasasbeh, the Jordanian pilot who was captured by Islamic State after his plane was downed over IS territory.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/syria-isis-news-us-special-forces-hostage-rescue-mission-fails-helicopters-under-fire-1481556

[simple1]

It is pretty sad that the high tech forces are once again with their backs to the wall.

The combined forces in Afghanistan complete with the USA and the CIA failed.

The same in Iraq.

It appears a few guys capture strategic key positions and over run the trained forces and use their weapons to then send the

so called trained militia running.

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

In my opinion nothing and I would be asking the military suppliers to hand back my cash.

Around a thousand years from the crusades and we are still on the losing side.

And where is Israel when you need them?

Well they never wade in to battle opponents they cannot beat.

However the nasties in IS are nothing we have seen before and need wiping out.

Who will do the job?

How is one downed aircraft and captured pilot amount to "backs to the wall"?

Was there any change in operations, resolve or tactics by the coalition forces as a result?

Attributing success or failure is more to do with objectives. There were no promises made that fighting IS would be easy, casualty free or that achievements would be swift. Unless mistaken, the same holds for other examples. There were no claims that possessing superior technology and military might guaranteed immediate positive decisive results.

Western forces in Afghanistan and Iraq were not defeated, were not routed. Withdrawal is not quite the same as retreat, Given that Western decision making is influenced by more than simple military considerations, the issues do not always lend themselves to simple military analysis. The "losing side" perception has more to do with the ways wars were fought in the past - all out and without many restrictive rules. Most current instances of modern warfare do not exhibit the same, hence making victory claims (and total lose ones, as well) harder to demonstrate.

Direct participation of Israel in the coalition was, correctly, deemed as politically problematic with some of the countries involved. Pretty sure Israeli Intel agencies are cooperating with their relevant counterparts. While IS does not, at present, pose a direct threat to Israel - it can be counted upon that action would be taken if (or rather, when) things change. This might happen earlier than expected, if reports regarding certain Syrian rebel groups in the vicinity of the border switching their alliance to IS are to be proved true.

IS will be defeated, sort of, sometime in in the not too long future. The odds are stacked against them to a degree where short of divine intervention (but that would sort of make their point anyway) their prospects of holding on to their present achievements are not that great. This does not mean things will end anytime soon, or that they will end in any decisive manner, nor does it guarantee that things in the Middle East would return to the way they were prior to IS.

Cannot immediately relocate the article, but a few days back read that the US miltary leader of the coalition against IS is now estimating it will take up to three years to eliminate them from Iraq, unsure whether this includes their presence in Syria.

I guess one matter is probably accurate in that another extreme radical Islamist terror group will pop up to replace them at some point, if in fact ISIS is mainly eliminated. As you know various Western government representative are indicating it's going to take generations to transition the Islamic "death cult" groups' ideology.

[Morch]

It is pretty sad that the high tech forces are once again with their backs to the wall.

The combined forces in Afghanistan complete with the USA and the CIA failed.

The same in Iraq.

It appears a few guys capture strategic key positions and over run the trained forces and use their weapons to then send the

so called trained militia running.

So what does all this high tech stuff complete with drones achieve.

In my opinion nothing and I would be asking the military suppliers to hand back my cash.

Around a thousand years from the crusades and we are still on the losing side.

And where is Israel when you need them?

Well they never wade in to battle opponents they cannot beat.

However the nasties in IS are nothing we have seen before and need wiping out.

Who will do the job?

How is one downed aircraft and captured pilot amount to "backs to the wall"?

Was there any change in operations, resolve or tactics by the coalition forces as a result?

Attributing success or failure is more to do with objectives. There were no promises made that fighting IS would be easy, casualty free or that achievements would be swift. Unless mistaken, the same holds for other examples. There were no claims that possessing superior technology and military might guaranteed immediate positive decisive results.

Western forces in Afghanistan and Iraq were not defeated, were not routed. Withdrawal is not quite the same as retreat, Given that Western decision making is influenced by more than simple military considerations, the issues do not always lend themselves to simple military analysis. The "losing side" perception has more to do with the ways wars were fought in the past - all out and without many restrictive rules. Most current instances of modern warfare do not exhibit the same, hence making victory claims (and total lose ones, as well) harder to demonstrate.

Direct participation of Israel in the coalition was, correctly, deemed as politically problematic with some of the countries involved. Pretty sure Israeli Intel agencies are cooperating with their relevant counterparts. While IS does not, at present, pose a direct threat to Israel - it can be counted upon that action would be taken if (or rather, when) things change. This might happen earlier than expected, if reports regarding certain Syrian rebel groups in the vicinity of the border switching their alliance to IS are to be proved true.

IS will be defeated, sort of, sometime in in the not too long future. The odds are stacked against them to a degree where short of divine intervention (but that would sort of make their point anyway) their prospects of holding on to their present achievements are not that great. This does not mean things will end anytime soon, or that they will end in any decisive manner, nor does it guarantee that things in the Middle East would return to the way they were prior to IS.

Cannot immediately relocate the article, but a few days back read that the US miltary leader of the coalition against IS is now estimating it will take up to three years to eliminate them from Iraq, unsure whether this includes their presence in Syria.

I guess one matter is probably accurate in that another extreme radical Islamist terror group will pop up to replace them at some point, if in fact ISIS is mainly eliminated. As you know various Western government representative are indicating it's going to take generations to transition the Islamic "death cult" groups' ideology.

This one, perhaps?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/world/middleeast/destroying-isis-may-take-3-years-white-house-says.html

Saying the IS will be defeated (eventually) does not, indeed, preclude another menace taking its place down the road. Considering how IS took over the prime time villain spot from AQ could be an indication that a similar transition could happen rather smoothly.

In my opinion, "generations", as a time frame, is a little optimistic. A few centuries more like it. Of course, it does not help things much that Western democracies often work on way shorter schedules (such as the next elections) - which makes mounting any really long term joint effort of this scale a futility. Things will just need to run their course.