ISIS Claims Responsibility for Russian Airliner in Sinai

The Russians have yet to respond to any such terrorist claims, but it’s safe to say that ISIS has President Putin’s full attention.

It’s unclear if militants allied with the Islamic State actually brought down the airliner. The video could be propaganda, but the terrorists do have surface-to-air missiles capable of bringing an airliner down.

The above is from IJN.  If this claim and the accompanying video are authentic, things could get very interesting.  Especially if it was a US-made MANPADS.  Putin and Russia are not constrained by the same self-loathing apology complex we are.  They certainly recognize ISIS for the threat that it is, and the United States as a paper tiger without the will (and soon, without the means) to be a major player in the Middle East.  The downing of an airliner with 224 people on board will not frighten the Russians, but will instead be an impetus for the autocratic Putin to ramp up the military response, all the while reinforcing Russia’s status once again as a world power.

H/T to LLL!

9 thoughts on “ISIS Claims Responsibility for Russian Airliner in Sinai”

  1. FTR, I’m highly skeptical about the video. And the plane went down more than 20 minutes after takeoff. Jets are almost always well above 18,000 feet by that time, which is well outside the range of any MANPADS.

    Russian operated civil aviation has an atrocious safety record on its own.

    1. We shall see. Though it may not be a legit video, there is a chance it is. The circumstances of the airliner’s crash might not be quite as represented. It wouldn’t be the first time the Rooskies would have told a story about something of this ilk.

  2. ISIS must not be too bright. I can’t believe that they would claim to have shot down this airliner, even if they did. Even worse is if they are making the claim as an opportunity even if they hadn’t. Does anybody think that Russian wouldn’t retaliate? Why invite that level of attention?

  3. There’s a good article from the Daily Mail. They include Plane Finder data showing the aircraft was at over 30,000 feet when the incident occurred. I seriously doubt a MANPAD could take out an A321 except at landing or takeoff, but it would be impossible at that height.

    Several articles have mentioned the tail coming off, and at least one person suggested an internal bomb. Also the data referenced above showed a vertical rate of 512 ft/min at 1446264769, -3584 at …4778, and -6080 at ..4790 so that sucker went down fast.

    In any case, I agree with Esli. This is not a good way to impress the Russians.

  4. Meh.. No group in the region has the equipment to take out an airplane at that altitude. Look to the maintenance records of a tail strike back in 2001 and the fact that the tail section was found 3 miles away from the rest of the wreckage. My bet – it the usual cavalier attitude that the Russians have for scheduled maintainence

    1. Plenty of groups in the region have the ability to plant bombs on airplanes. If they find it to be such. But that leaves ISIS claiming responsibility as a bit of a head-scratcher, no?

    2. It wouldn’t be the first aircraft whose tail section failed in flight. China Airlines Flight 611, for example. “The final investigation report found that the accident was the result of metal fatigue caused by inadequate maintenance after an earlier tailstrike incident” . Twenty years earlier.

  5. Looks like US and UK intelligence analysts are pretty certain it was a Sinai affiliate of ISIS that planted the bomb that brought down the Russian airliner. The IR detection of a flash was pretty strong evidence.

Comments are closed.