U.S. Warplanes Face Down Iraqi Jet Over Saudi

Yahoo News ^ | Sun Mar 2, 7:48 AM ET | Mariam Isa

[Kev-Head]

PRINCE SULTAN AIRBASE, Saudi Arabia (Reuters) - U.S. warplanes were within two minutes of firing at an Iraqi Mig-25 fighter jet when it sneaked into Saudi airspace in an intensifying cat-and-mouse game between Western and Iraqi warplanes, U.S. air force pilots say.

The daring probe on Thursday by Iraq's fastest warplane -- a move apparently rarely attempted since the 1991 Gulf War -- indicated Baghdad was willing to take risks to test U.S.-led forces rapidly building up planes and troops in Saudi Arabia.

"He came 15-20 miles into Saudi airspace and went nose-to-nose with us at 70,000 feet," F-15C fighter pilot Lt. Col. Matt "Zap" Molloy told Reuters in an interview.

"He wisely turned around when we gave him a good hard radar lock ... We were two minutes away from firing an air-to-air missile in his direction," he said.

Saudi officials said they had no knowledge of any such incursion.

The MiG-25, code-named Foxbat by NATO allies, is an interceptor aircraft developed for the former Soviet airforce capable of flying at three times the speed of sound. It can also be used for reconnaissance.

U.S. pilots say that in the past two months they have encountered these planes more frequently in a "no-fly" zone over Iraq, set up after the Gulf War, while Iraqi troop activity has also intensified.

"They are stepping it up and trying to see what's out there ... listening and looking more," Molloy said.

"But we give them the benefit of the doubt -- when threatened we have to make a difficult call, and we coordinate with coalition forces in a measured way."

At present, coalition planes based at the Prince Sultan Airbase in Saudi Arabia are only allowed to take "defensive" action as part of strict rules of engagement agreed with authorities in the kingdom.

What this means is that Western planes could fire back only if under a "continuing" threat from Iraqi planes or missiles.

The Iraqi plane had posed a clear threat, U.S. pilots said.

As shots from the ground are normally wild and sporadic, Saudi-based U.S. warplanes just veer away when attacked, then call in jets based in Kuwait or from aircraft carriers to attack the guns on Iraqi soil.

"It's quite a dance, the rules are very strict. We don't want to act in an irrational way and we don't want to be doing anything illegal or politically untenable," Air Force Colonel James Moschgat, vice commander of U.S. planes patrolling a no-fly zone over southern Iraq, told Reuters.

AIR BASE ROLE CONTENTIOUS ISSUE

The issue of what foreign troops on Prince Sultan Airbase, 50 miles southeast of Riyadh, will do if war with Iraq breaks out has become increasingly contentious as Washington builds up its forces in the region.

Saudi authorities have repeatedly said they are against an attack on Iraq and will not allow U.S. forces to launch any invasion of the country from their territory.

In the event of war the role of the airbase -- which until recently was off limits to journalists -- remains unclear.

"The real question is whether we will be able to do direct attacks from here. We will have the capability to do that from here but that option is still being discussed by our governments," Moschgat said.

"Our mission will be to deny Iraq offensive capability by having as robust a force as possible."

He said U.S. and British forces at the base were being built up to ensure that in the event of war, the existing coalition would be able to patrol southern Iraqi skies round-the-clock instead of several hours a day as at present.

He added that regardless of what happened, a command and control center at the base would probably remain in charge of all the coalition air forces in the region.

Moschgat said the number of foreign troops -- mostly American -- at the base had reached 7,200 from 5,000 in early January. More U.S. troops were arriving by air every other day.

The normal 90-day period for U.S. soldiers to stay was suspended in late January. The U.S. military is erecting a tent city for the extra troops and Moschgat said there would be room for 14,000 foreign soldiers when it was ready in about a week.

The base would be able to take about 200 aircraft when the buildup was complete, he added.

[Kev-Head]

If Iraq is so against war with the U.S. then why pull a stunt like this. Open your eyes World Saddam is asking for it.

[AmericanBabe]

Don't you think that Saudi should be allowing us to use their bases? After all, if we hadn't protected them 12 years ago, they'd all be speaking Iraqi now.

[Arkinsaw]

The last war they got "left-hooked" by a surprise force from the Saudi wasteland that knocked their block off. Thats what this guy was looking for.

[bannie]

With eyes wide open, I concur.

[Dog Gone]

This was breaking news on Thursday.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Wonder how many Mig 25's they've got ?

[Archangelsk]

Iraqis speak Arabic like the Saudis. You're probably thinking of Iranians who speak Farsi.

[polemikos]

If Iraq is so against war with the U.S. then why pull a stunt like this.

1 - Possible recon flight
2 - Trying to provoke US into breaking Saudi rules (ugh) of engagement

[Mr. Mojo]

Why didn't those Eagles blast that Foxbat out of the sky?

[Petronski]

This is a Foxbat, with Soviet markings:

[onedoug]

We should state the obvious, and stage from Israel.

[Cold Heat]

As shots from the ground are normally wild and sporadic, Saudi-based U.S. warplanes just veer away when attacked, then call in jets based in Kuwait or from aircraft carriers to attack the guns on Iraqi soil. "It's quite a dance, the rules are very strict. We don't want to act in an irrational way and we don't want to be doing anything illegal or politically untenable," Air Force Colonel James Moschgat, vice commander of U.S. planes patrolling a no-fly zone over southern Iraq, told Reuters.

What is irrational, is the fact that we put up with this nonsense!

[tet68]

F-15C fighter pilot Lt. Col. Matt "ZOT" Molloy told Reuters in an interview.

There, that's better, probably a former admin moderator.

[Marauder]

I agree. As I recall, this is the same kind of crap that caused us to lose the Viet Nam conflict.
My vote would have been to hose him just for being in the no-fly zone.

[PhilDragoo]

"It's quite a dance, the rules are very strict. We don't want to act in an irrational way and we don't want to be doing anything illegal or politically untenable," Air Force Colonel James Moschgat, vice commander of U.S. planes patrolling a no-fly zone over southern Iraq, told Reuters.

Defending against attack whether tactical in Saudi or strategic worldwide is rational.

Continuing to kiss Saudi butt is not rational.

As for "illegal" and "politically untenable" it's long past time for the pc herd to be culled.

Ms. Moschgat and her upstream command chain as far as necessary should be dropped into Baghdad for sensitivity training.

[Beck_isright]

Why the hell wasn't this plane downed??? Are we going to let one of their mirages with the aerosal dispersal tanks buzz our assembly areas in Kuwait and a mass disaster to occur????? These planes should be wasted the minute they cross into the no-fly zone.

[Mr. Mojo]

"It's quite a dance, the rules are very strict. We don't want to act in an irrational way and we don't want to be doing anything illegal or politically untenable," Air Force Colonel James Moschgat

This is the same sort of legalistic nonsense that prevented us from firing on Sheik Omar's jeep. It's high time we extinguish these Clintonesque wusses from our military.

[Paraclete]

Just out of curiosity, how does an F-15 stack up against the "Foxbat," from a performance perspective?

[nomorecameljocks]

Reading through the report, I begin to smell a rules of engagement rat. Hopefully, insane ROE's will not be used to tie our guys hands in the upcoming clash. I hope and believe that the Bushies have enough respect for our troops not to allow such a thing.

Examples of past insane ROE's:
"You may only fire after you have been fired upon" Sounds good on TV. Unfortunately, it is difficult to return fire when you are dead.

"Military targets within X yard/meters of civilian facilities may not be targeted" Again, sounds nice on TV. Of course, the enemy sites his AAA, missles, etc. on the roof of hospitals.

"Ports, staging areas, depots, etc. may not be targeted" Why use one or two bombs to destroy enemy supplies/weapons where they are concentrated when hundreds or thousands can be used when they are disbursed? This makes perfect sense to bomb salesmen, fuel salesmen, airplane salesmen, casket salesmen, etc.

[ruiner]

I agree! He was probably probing our defenses to a kamikaze style attack or chembio attack.

I guess we know anyone in Saudi, 15 miles from the Iraq border is toast.