Because the targets exist in the real world rather than solely on a map, ie you can see them in the real world, and they most likely had to do multiple approaches. The two situations are not comparable.
It hasn't even been established that the plane did violate Turkish airspace. We know for a fact that it was hit over Syria and crashed in Syria. Russia stated they did not receive any warnings from Turkey and Turkey has not released any audio to corroborate their claims. A plane doesn't get shot down after going through a country's airspace for a few seconds (even if that did happen), without any attempts to escort it or establish a visual, without said country aching to do it. And yes, shit will get serious and Turkey will not be on the good side of it, with their free pass of having a porous border with overflowing cheap ISIS oil and jihadis going through it probably going up in flames.
[–] DickHertz 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
You understand that Russia has it's own global navigation satellite network which is probably good enough to do non-precision approaches to land a plane in low visibility situations so I don't know why you keep bringing up maps as if the plane doesn't have multiple systems on board that can determine were it is.
We'll see what each side offers as evidence of the incursion or non-incursion as the case may be. There's enough shit in the air and sea that these two parties aren't the only ones to know whether or not not the Russians did or did not enter Turkish airspace. Not sure if outside observers would know where the Turkish plane was when it fired on Russians.
One thing is certain there are plenty of targets Russia can bomb without risking starting WWIII if they give a fuck. They could ask the French to cover the space near Turkey and move on. If they are entering Turkish airspace they are in the wrong regardless of how anyone other than Turkey believes this should be handled.