The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Everything related to politics in Cyprus and the rest of the world.

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Paphitis » Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:44 pm

Btw Robin Hood,

I don't have a PPL, Night Rating, IMC, Commercial Pilot Licence and I've never held any of these in my life.

I've never even held a Student Pilot Licence, and never did a GFPT.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 20971
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Robin Hood » Wed Mar 01, 2017 7:15 pm

Of course I am not current, the last time I flew as P1 was about 2000 but with a qualified instructor (owner) in the RH seat and that was with Griffon Aviation in Paphos.
Paphitis:
Can you execute NDB, VOR, ILS, GNSS, RNAV and VNAV Approaches with that? Or does it just let you fly in conditions below VFR? get into the specifics please. By IMC do you mean Special VFR? Or did you just learn to get yourself out of trouble?

To the above YES, I can do just what you do only not commercially and not in controlled airspace! I flew a full airways equipped Piper 181 Warrior. Went blind after take off with an instaructor acting as ATC and could fly over North Wales and the Cheshire plain and make a full instrument approach on VOR and ADF to acquire the ILS and get right down to over the threshold when the slot was opened ..... and every time from day I was right on the center line at about 40 feet.
Flying on Instruments takes a bloody long time to master and it's friggin VERY DANGEROUS for people like you.

A sweeping statement ..... people like me? I am an instrument engineer by profession, my life has been ‘flying’ chemical plants and gas/oil plants just on instruments. If you understand instruments then flying a light aeroplane on them is really not that different. I am not claiming to be a commercial pilot, I was just a fairly well qualified UK PPL
tell me what the privileges are for this IMC Rating.

It is restricted to certain classes of airspace i.e. not in commercial airways, but within the controlled airspace of an airfield on the departure and approach and leaving the zone for derestricted airspace, obviously. It was a long time ago ..... but I can still do it on a PC flight simulator. :roll:

Instrument qualifications in the UK

Unless a pilot holds a current instrument qualification they must remain in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) at all times. The exact definition of VMC varies in the different classes of airspace, but they prescribe a certain inflight visibility and distance to be kept away from cloud, and may require the pilot to remain in sight of the surface.

When meteorological conditions are worse than the VMC minima, Instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) are said to exist. The training for the full Instrument Rating is very stringent and costly. Because of this, the UK CAA also issues the IR (Restricted) Rating, which is a limited form of instrument rating which is a lot simpler to obtain.

This was known as the (IMC) rating. It allows flight in IMC but only in certain classes of airspace and with restrictions on conditions for take-off and landing. This is a national rating, meaning it is not ordinarily recognised outside of the UK. It had previously been agreed that pilots who already held the rating before April 2014 would be allowed to use it indefinitely within the UK and to transfer it to a new EASA Private Pilot’s Licence as an Instrument Rating (Restricted). EASA proposed in October 2013 that the UK should be able to issue new restricted instrument ratings for UK pilots until April 2019.

The full Instrument Rating can also be added onto an EASA licence. This allows flight in instrument meteorological conditions in all classes of airspace, provided the aircraft is capable of the conditions encountered. In particular, an IR is required to act as a pilot on a scheduled flight.
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Paphitis » Thu Mar 02, 2017 1:40 am

Yes thank you, I know what IMC is too.

Where did you do the ILS and remained outside Controlled Air?

And one more thing, doing it on the simulator isn't what I'm talking about. You can't experience Spatial Disorientation on a simulator and its that which will kill you. Reading instruments and an AH is easy, but ignoring all your basic human instincts and sensations that we have had since we were cave men isn't easy, especially when you got no sense of balance or visual acuity.

But what about limited panel. Can you stay upright on a Turn and Bank Coordinator with the AH failed? Did they teach you that or not? You were an accident waiting to happen Robin Hood. Pure and simple.

You're only a PPL IR and the UK CAA was suppose to repeal these qualifications in 2014 to be in line with the rest of the world. It didn't because of the British Pilots Association and will do it in 2019.

they don't want PPL pilots to have these qualifications because its a recipe for disaster.

And your attitude proves that. You profess to have under 100 hours and think you can fly IMC at night and in anger in a busy cockpit environment and without an instructor to hold your hand.

Would you turn your landing lights on the circuit or passing 10000 and minimum 15nms out? Last time you said circuit.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 20971
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Robin Hood » Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:13 am

Paphitis wrote:Yes thank you, I know what IMC is too.

Where did you do the ILS and remained outside Controlled Air?

And one more thing, doing it on the simulator isn't what I'm talking about. You can't experience Spatial Disorientation on a simulator and its that which will kill you. Reading instruments and an AH is easy, but ignoring all your basic human instincts and sensations that we have had since we were cave men isn't easy, especially when you got no sense of balance or visual acuity.

But what about limited panel. Can you stay upright on a Turn and Bank Coordinator with the AH failed? Did they teach you that or not? You were an accident waiting to happen Robin Hood. Pure and simple.

You're only a PPL IR and the UK CAA was suppose to repeal these qualifications in 2014 to be in line with the rest of the world. It didn't because of the British Pilots Association and will do it in 2019.

they don't want PPL pilots to have these qualifications because its a recipe for disaster.

And your attitude proves that. You profess to have under 100 hours and think you can fly IMC at night and in anger in a busy cockpit environment and without an instructor to hold your hand.

Would you turn your landing lights on the circuit or passing 10000 and minimum 15nms out? Last time you said circuit.


I have explained far more to you than you ever have to me so, I suggest that you read what I said very carefully and try to understand it! You have slap dash approach to almost anything, are you the same with your pre-flight planning, fuel calculations and loading schedules?

The answer to all these questions is in the post.
Paphitis ..... you fly aeroplanes ..... so can I, but I have never done it for a living. For someone who never answers a single question put to him, can you think of any reason why I should have to face an inquisition from you on skills I last demonstrated over 20 years ago? Your questions are trying to score points and are all related to fundamental knowledge that ANYONE who gets a licence would have.

Again, the answer is YES to all your questions, do you really think the CAA would issue a licence and IMC Rating without me meeting the standards required? I was taught by a retired British Airways Captain with 1000's of hours of experience. As well as being able to fly I can also understand almost all instrumentation aeronautical or commercial/industrial. ..... something I doubt you could do.

BTW there is no such thing as a Student Pilots License and IMC and night ratings are not commercial. Also, in the modern world a student commercial pilot will spend most of his time flying a simulator and very few hours flying an aeroplane.

Now tell me ....... how old you are? ...... where you learned to fly? ....... what aircraft type(s) you learned to fly on ...... how many hours total you have? .......and your type ratings ....... name some airlines you have flown for as a Captain/First Officer? Then we will be able to see what sort of pilot you are!
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Robin Hood » Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:14 pm

To resume on the original OP ...... UKRAINE/CRIMEA:

LondonRake:

If the Scots hold a referendum without the agreement of the UK Government, which Sturgeon says she can, and that referendum shows a majority vote to break form the UK (Self Determination?), then this, like the Crimean referendum, would not be recognised by the international community ? Presumably on the grounds it was contrary to International Law and nothing less than Unilateral Declaration of Independence? :?:

The British would be very upset as their nuclear submarine facility at Faslane(?) would be under threat and would no doubt defend it, maybe by reinforcing the garrison by sending troops to protect their interestst? :?:

If Scotland then asked to join the EU, i.e. asked the EU to 'annex' them, and make them an autonomous State within a European Union (Eu.Federation), then the EU would have illegally 'invaded' Scotland and again would be breaking International Law? :?:

I see no difference in such a scenario as that which was enacted in Crimea in 2014! :roll: :x

So, do you apply International Law to this scenario in the same way you have with events in Crimea .......... or does this come under a different set of International Laws? :?: :roll:
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Sotos » Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:16 am

What is legal and what is fair and right are not always the same thing. Slavery used to be legal. Segregation based on race used to be legal. Being gay used to be illegal. If what is legal and what is right are not the same, then what should change is the law, not the other way around. The case of Crimea: Neither the Ukrainians nor the Russians are native there. The Russians are the majority. Crimea used to be part of Russia and it was given to Ukraine during Soviet rule merely because access from Ukraine was easier. Therefore if the majority of the people of Crimea want to be independent or part of Russia and not part of Ukraine then so be it. The same goes for Scotland and Kurdistan. The "West" is hypocritical in placing sanctions against Russia for this issue when they don't do the same for Turkey about Cyprus. Turkey occupies northern Cyprus with 40.000 troops and they ethnically cleansed the majority of the population from north Cyprus and replaced them with their own Settlers. Even if you call what Russia did in Crimea bad (because it is against international law) what Turkey did and does to Cyprus is FAR FAR FAR worst as it not only violates international law, but is committing war crimes such as ethnic cleansing and transferring part of her own population on occupied territory. And also lets not forget the SBAs in Cyprus. They are legal just like slavery was legal, and just as unethical. The British gained the bases by playing a dirty game against the native Cypriots and the bases are nothing more than a remnant of Colonialism.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 10662
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Robin Hood » Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:37 am

Sotos:
What is legal and what is fair and right are not always the same thing. Slavery used to be legal. Segregation based on race used to be legal. Being gay used to be illegal. If what is legal and what is right are not the same, then what should change is the law, not the other way around.

I agree with you but no matter what laws you apply, they have to be applied to all ..... there can be no opt out’s for selected individuals or States. If a country declares itself above the law .... then the law does not work! You could not introduce a speed limit on the Highway ......... and then exclude certain models of Mercedes and BMW’s from having to comply.
Therefore if the majority of the people of Crimea want to be independent or part of Russia and not part of Ukraine then so be it. The same goes for Scotland and Kurdistan. The "West" is hypocritical in placing sanctions against Russia for this issue when they don't do the same for Turkey about Cyprus.

Self determination .... one of the Western corner stones but a classic example of where the law is rigidly applied in some instances and ignored in other’s.
......... but is committing war crimes such as ethnic cleansing and transferring part of her own population on occupied territory.

The similarity between what happened in Cyprus and what is a continuing war crime in Palestine is another example of having laws that are only applied when it suits those with the power to decide whether the law should be applied or not.
The British gained the bases by playing a dirty game against the native Cypriots and the bases are nothing more than a remnant of Colonialism.

I’m not sure ‘playing a dirty game’ is a fair description? They played the game according to the laws/rules that applied at the time. The Island was never invaded or taken by force by the UK, they annexed it from Turkey in WWI.

Were they fair to Cypriots? No, they treated Cyprus like any other colony ......... as you say it is really a remnant of Colonialism but even now is not illegal.

The country got its independence, with conditions (The Bases) but it just swapped one self interest group for another and the UK got the bits that they were interested in. You now have the Cypriot establishment working in their interests instead of a foreign power. Cypriots are better off now than under British rule, that is true but life is still dominated by the self interests of a small Elite. :wink:
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Sotos » Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:05 pm

I agree with you but no matter what laws you apply, they have to be applied to all ..... there can be no opt out’s for selected individuals or States.

I agree that they should be applied to all, but if one state doesn't follow the rules it doesn't mean that none should. Many violate the speed limit but not all pay a penalty. What is hypocritical is when somebody who doesn't follow the rules himself accuses others.

I’m not sure ‘playing a dirty game’ is a fair description? They played the game according to the laws/rules that applied at the time. The Island was never invaded or taken by force by the UK, they annexed it from Turkey in WWI.


Yes, but they continued holding on Cyprus long after WWII when Colonialism was already unacceptable and they played a very dirty game to keep parts of Cyprus under Colonial rule to this day. The vast majority of Cypriots wanted union with Greece and the right thing to do would be to hold a referendum in Cyprus for this, just like they did for Gibraltar and the Falklands. But they remember about democracy only when it suits them.
User avatar
Sotos
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 10662
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 2:50 am

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Robin Hood » Tue Mar 14, 2017 9:07 pm

Sotos wrote:
I agree with you but no matter what laws you apply, they have to be applied to all ..... there can be no opt out’s for selected individuals or States.

I agree that they should be applied to all, but if one state doesn't follow the rules it doesn't mean that none should. Many violate the speed limit but not all pay a penalty. What is hypocritical is when somebody who doesn't follow the rules himself accuses others.

If the majority follow the rules under the auspices of a supreme global authority (a United Nations with balls?) then those that don't could be made to toe the line, no matter how 'exceptional' they deem them selves to be ..... or face UN Globally enforced sanctions ..... maybe? I am not holding my breath for that to happen. :roll:

I’m not sure ‘playing a dirty game’ is a fair description? They played the game according to the laws/rules that applied at the time. The Island was never invaded or taken by force by the UK, they annexed it from Turkey in WWI.


Yes, but they continued holding on Cyprus long after WWII when Colonialism was already unacceptable and they played a very dirty game to keep parts of Cyprus under Colonial rule to this day. The vast majority of Cypriots wanted union with Greece and the right thing to do would be to hold a referendum in Cyprus for this, just like they did for Gibraltar and the Falklands. But they remember about democracy only when it suits them.

Maybe you are right? I tend not to express opinions on politics in Cyprus .... I am a guest here and it is something I regard as a minefield and a sure way to make enemies! :wink: :|

Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: Russian and the Ukraine (International Law position)

Postby Londonrake » Tue Mar 14, 2017 10:36 pm

RH

Well, 7 pages of posts! :)

Like most threads I suppose it has gone off in diverse directions. Some interesting, some not so.

However, as far as I am concerned the essence of the OP (mine) was decided on the first page. There is no rational "defence" no really credible alternative view. It's quite simple. As I seemed to have pointed out, so many times.

I followed "The War Against Syria" as a passive observer for a long time.

During that discussion on many occasions it was argued that the case for Russian intervention in Syria was supported by International Law.

I have never argued with that. I am sure it is quite correct.

However, under the very same law the case for Russian intervention in Ukraine has been condemned. To argue against that is clearly a fundamental contradiction (aka hypocrisy)

Subsequently, over dozens of posts, there have been twists, turns, diversions, obfuscations. All to muddy the waters.

In the OP I posted an analysis by a legal entity regarding Ukrainian events. I did not seek it out specifically to support my case. It just came top of a search. LexNes, is purely a legal, non political entity and not a site which, like "independent news sites" (aka, rabidly anti-West Blacklisted News/Informationclearinghouse) seems to me to be in any way prejudiced. Moreover, by a simple search you can find many other such supporting views.

However, as has always been my experience with you it was of course a total waste of time. IIRC the response was a series of personal attacks and a "You have proven nothing".

It's simple. You cannot credibly continually quote International Law to support one situation whilst claiming that a second pronouncement using the same law, for the same country, is in some way a "Western plot". That's paranoia (Ohh, good grief. Heaven forbid!)

I have not and will not - in this thread - get dragged into a discussion about events in Ukraine during 2014. Despite the fact you have continually tried to do that. However, whilst I find your Scottish analogy fascinating it isn't really sound.

When the Scottish Parliament in Holyrood votes to approve another (once in a generation :roll: ) referendum it will be passed to the national Parliament in Westminster for a decision. There seems little doubt that it will be approved but with some disagreement about timing.

As far as the Faslane facility is concerned. A central plank of the SNP's dogma is to get rid of it. They are unilateralist. Portsmouth no doubt will be eagerly ready and waiting. How that will go down with the 20,000 dependent Scottish jobs will be another consideration. Not to mention the 6000 at Rosyth. This, in a country that would relatively be worse off than Greece, if it had to stand alone (Spain will veto its EU membership).

How that entirely speculative fantasy you propose compares to what happened in the Ukraine escapes me.

However, there is a glimmer of compromise. At least we agree on the Deutsche Mark. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I would add that clearly, any post which does not meet with the "official" supportive stance on Russia is to be avoided. When I floated one on what I think was a fairly innocuous stab at " Actually, things in Russia aren't quite as wonderful as posted" it met with pages of personal and racist abuse. Including being called a "CUNT" and a victim of childhood sexual abuse. Almost all of it absolutely nothing to do with the OP. It just adds to the effect of this being an incestuous Forum. Who on Earth would ever want to post a contradictory view on Russia? "Oh - he's a kiddie paedo victim CUNT who's been "shot down". :roll:

Then you get an OP by the same person which talks about "abusers" and maintaining the "quality" of the Forum. You really would struggle to make it up.
Londonrake
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:19 pm
Location: ROC

PreviousNext

Return to Politics and Elections

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests