3 ms·

the plane technically had to land in austria after all other countries refused entry for 'technical' reasons. This one involved KGB agents who coerced the flig

the plane technically had to land in austria after all other countries refused entry for 'technical' reasons. This one involved KGB agents who coerced the flight to divert by claiming there was a bomb

ghostwriter 5y ago
what was the basis and the motive for ally countries unilaterally not to allow the plane to land? If the motives are not different, then the fighter jet could be seen as a similar "technical reason" in this case too.
- relativ575 5y ago
  Mental gymnastic you are doing there. Spain and France denied the airspace, meaning the flight couldn't gone through either of them. There is no "not to allow the plane to land". In fact an airplane calling emergency has priority to land anywhere, regardless of the political difference with the host country. On this topic, this happened with a flight from a US's air base in Afghanistan, rerouted to Iran because of a "bureaucratic issue": [0] - https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-iran-aircraft/u-s-says-plane-from-afghanistan-landed-in-iran-over-bureaucratic-issue-idUSL1N0R627Q20140905 https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-iran-aircraft/u-s-says-p...
  - ghostwriter 5y ago
    > Mental gymnastic you are doing there. Quite contrary, I'm asking for the basis and the motive of denying one specific flight with one specific individual on board a routine procedure of air travel, something that was allowed to hundreds of other flights on that same day. "landing" vs "airspace" is a non-essential detail here, and depending on the context of a situation, either could be denied to achieve the desired goal. I'm asking about the motives of the goal.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  It was US pressure obviously, for which the countries apologized. It was an asshole move by the US but this is on another level, it involves foreign civilians, KGB agents, fake bomb threats and fighter jets
  - ghostwriter 5y ago
    > It was an asshole move by the US but this is on another level, it involves foreign civilians, KGB agents, fake bomb threats and fighter jets no doubt, when force is the standard a murderer wins over a pickpocket. And then it escalates.
  - jeltz 5y ago
    I would say the Morales grounding was worse because it also infringed on the immunity of states of head on top of grounding a plane.
    - type0 5y ago
      It uncovered international political coercion to catch dissidents and that sets a much more troubling precedents.
    - dnautics 5y ago
      Aside from pragmatism, is there any ethical reason why state leaders should enjoy extra rights above anyone else?
dnautics 5y ago
it didn't even "have" to land in austtria, they landed there because it was easy. They probably had fuel enough to land in any one of a ton of other countries if they so chose.
- throwaway21_ 5y ago
  No, they certainly didn't have to land in Austria. But somehow, god knows why, certain countries closed their airspace for that specific plane. I'm inclined to belive that more countries would suddenly close their airspace too if plane chose not to land in Austria but to go to some country where Snowden won't be in danger of being arrested - France, Spain, Portugal and Italy are hardly the only one that would bow under US pressure.

ghostwriter 5y ago

what was the basis and the motive for ally countries unilaterally not to allow the plane to land? If the motives are not different, then the fighter jet could be seen as a similar "technical reason" in this case too.

relativ575 5y ago
Mental gymnastic you are doing there. Spain and France denied the airspace, meaning the flight couldn't gone through either of them. There is no "not to allow the plane to land". In fact an airplane calling emergency has priority to land anywhere, regardless of the political difference with the host country. On this topic, this happened with a flight from a US's air base in Afghanistan, rerouted to Iran because of a "bureaucratic issue": [0] - https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-iran-aircraft/u-s-says-plane-from-afghanistan-landed-in-iran-over-bureaucratic-issue-idUSL1N0R627Q20140905 https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-iran-aircraft/u-s-says-p...
- ghostwriter 5y ago
  > Mental gymnastic you are doing there. Quite contrary, I'm asking for the basis and the motive of denying one specific flight with one specific individual on board a routine procedure of air travel, something that was allowed to hundreds of other flights on that same day. "landing" vs "airspace" is a non-essential detail here, and depending on the context of a situation, either could be denied to achieve the desired goal. I'm asking about the motives of the goal.
cblconfederate 5y ago
It was US pressure obviously, for which the countries apologized. It was an asshole move by the US but this is on another level, it involves foreign civilians, KGB agents, fake bomb threats and fighter jets
- ghostwriter 5y ago
  > It was an asshole move by the US but this is on another level, it involves foreign civilians, KGB agents, fake bomb threats and fighter jets no doubt, when force is the standard a murderer wins over a pickpocket. And then it escalates.
- jeltz 5y ago
  I would say the Morales grounding was worse because it also infringed on the immunity of states of head on top of grounding a plane.
  - type0 5y ago
    It uncovered international political coercion to catch dissidents and that sets a much more troubling precedents.
  - dnautics 5y ago
    Aside from pragmatism, is there any ethical reason why state leaders should enjoy extra rights above anyone else?

dnautics 5y ago

it didn't even "have" to land in austtria, they landed there because it was easy. They probably had fuel enough to land in any one of a ton of other countries if they so chose.

throwaway21_ 5y ago
No, they certainly didn't have to land in Austria. But somehow, god knows why, certain countries closed their airspace for that specific plane. I'm inclined to belive that more countries would suddenly close their airspace too if plane chose not to land in Austria but to go to some country where Snowden won't be in danger of being arrested - France, Spain, Portugal and Italy are hardly the only one that would bow under US pressure.