The Levant crisis.(Israel,SYRIA,Lebanon,etc)

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 11:49

now look into map carefully, who stands in between caspian & syria.

yes, mossad agent barzani.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 11:53

MAP: Russian Su-24 crash scheme by defense ministry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Cs8jdJKSGo

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Nov 2015 11:55

Putin draws a line in the sand.Let's see how the Turk-sh*t Sultan and his bumchums react.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/n ... says-putin
Russia will pull out of Syria coalition if downing of jet is repeated, says Putin
Russian president agrees closer ties to defeat Islamic State but says any more ‘unacceptable’ incidents would mean ‘an end to cooperation with anybody’

Russia will pull out of the US-led coalition fighting Islamic State in Syria if there was any repeat of the shooting down of its fighter jet by Turkey, Vladimir Putin has warned.

Speaking after talks in the Kremlin with French president Francois Hollande, Putin voiced lingering anger at Turkey’s actions, saying he viewed the downing of the jet as an act of betrayal by a country Moscow had thought was its friend.
The story of a radicalisation: 'I was not thinking my thoughts. I was not myself'

And while Putin said Moscow was ready to keep cooperating with western powers against the “mutual enemy” of Isis, he said the downing of the jet by Turkey this week was “unacceptable”.

“We are ready to cooperate with the coalition which is led by the United States. But of course incidents like the destruction of our aircraft and the deaths of our servicemen ... are absolutely unacceptable,” Putin said at a news conference with Hollande.

“And we proceed from the position that there will be no repeat of this, otherwise we’ll have no need of cooperation with anybody, any coalition, any country.”

The Russian leader said, under the cooperation already established with the US-led coalition, Russia’s military had passed on details of the flight plan of the jet that was shot down this week.

“Why did we pass this information to the Americans? Either they were not controlling what their allies were doing, or they are leaking this information all over the place,” Putin said.

Hollande was on the latest leg of a diplomatic mission to build a common front against the militant Islamist group that has claimed responsibility for the attacks in Paris two weeks ago that killed 130 people. He met US president Barack Obama on Tuesday and has also asked David Cameron to swing the British military behind the campaign.

With Russia suffering an Isis-suspected attack on a passenger jet in the Sinai peninsula in October, killing all 224 people on board, Hollande and Putin agreed to greater military cooperation.

They would “exchange information about which territories are occupied by the healthy part of the opposition rather than terrorists, and will avoid targeting them with our airstrikes”, Putin said.

Russia was ready to cooperate with other groups ready to fight Isis and he reaffirmed Moscow’s long-standing view that Syrian president Bashar al-Assad was also an ally in the fight against terrorism.

“I believe that the fate of the president of Syria must stay in the hands of the Syrian people,” Putin said, describing the Syrian army as a “natural ally” if Isis was to be defeated on the ground.

Hollande, in contrast, said the Syrian head of state “does not have his place in Syria’s future”.

Both Russia and France have stepped up their aerial bombing campaigns in Syria since the attacks in Paris. Both leaders said strikes against vehicles transporting oil across territory controlled by Islamic State would increase and thereby deliver a blow to a key source of financing for the militant group.

But Putin used the media conference to continue the war of words over the downing of the jet by repeating accusations against Turkey of turning a blind eye to oil smuggling by Islamic State.

He said it was “theoretically possible” that Ankara was unaware of oil supplies entering its territory from Isis-controlled areas of Syria but added that this was hard to imagine.

Russian prime minister Dmitry Medvedev alleged on Wednesday that Turkish officials were benefiting from Isis oil sales, while foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said it was no secret that “terrorists” use Turkish territory.

Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, speaking in Ankara on Thursday, rejected the accusations. “Shame on you. It’s clear where Turkey buys its oil and gas ... Those who claim we are buying oil from [Isis] like this must prove their claims. Nobody can slander this country.

“If you are seeking the source of weaponry and financial power of [Isis], the first place to look is the Assad regime and countries that act with it,” he said.

Hollande said the downing of the Russian jet highlighted the need for countries to coordinate their military activities more closely to avoid a possible repetition of what he called a “regrettable incident“. He again called for a “de-escalation” of the tensions between Moscow and Ankara.

Meanwhile France will on Friday mourn the victims of the Paris attacks, with Hollande leading a solemn ceremony in the capital.

Families of those killed will join some of the wounded at ceremonies at the Invalides, the gilded 17th-century complex in central Paris that houses a military hospital and museum and Napoleon’s tomb.

PS:It would've been in the fitness of events had Pres..Putin slaughtered a "Turkey" yesterday,on Thanksgiving!

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 27 Nov 2015 11:59

Itching for the blockade I guess
Erdogan's Twisted Logic: S-400 Must Not Shoot Down Turkish Jets Over Syria - Nov 27, 2015

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Nov 2015 12:02

A v.good Q indeed.It clearly points to pre-meditated murder.Sultan Erdogan in a war criminal .
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/n ... k-galeotti

Why did it take Turkey just 17 seconds to shoot down Russian jet?
Mark Galeotti

Ankara has delivered an incendiary message to Moscow, and while there may be too much at stake for the conflict to spill out of control it also won’t go away
Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan says he gave the order to fire himself.
*(He learnt of the intrusion,its details and gave the order to fire all within 17 seconds? Whom is he bullsh*tting):rotfl:

Thursday 26 November 2015 13.18 GMT

Even if Turkey is right that a Russian fighter jet strayed into its airspace, the plane was within Ankara’s borders for just 17 seconds before being attacked – and was making no hostile moves against the Turks.

Airspace incursions, granted usually in less politically tense contexts, happen all the time, and generally you’d expect warning shots to be fired and then attempts to force the intruder to leave or to land.

That the Turks shot down the jet and did so within 17 seconds – with the president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, saying he gave the order to fire himself – suggests very strongly they were waiting for a Russian plane to come into or close enough to Turkish airspace with the aim of delivering a rather pyrotechnic message.

Turkish military releases audio recordings said to be warnings to Russian jet

In this respect, it is understandable that the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, called the attack a provocation and an ambush.

Moscow may have been foolish to let its planes stray so close to the border – doubly so if its rules of engagement allowed pilots to dip into Turkish airspace when it was operationally useful (as is likely). But Turkey’s response went way beyond the usual practice.

In 2012, the Syrians shot down a Turkish jet which had entered its airspace, and Erdogan’s furious response at the time was that “a short-term border violation can never be a pretext for an attack”.

(At the time, Nato secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen called it “another example of the Syrian authorities’ disregard for international norms”. There hasn’t been a similar critique of Ankara.)

Yet no one wants this conflict to escalate, and both Ankara and Moscow are working to that end. Presumably Erdogan feels satisfied the point has been made, and presumably Moscow, while no doubt harboring its grudges, is aware it has a great deal of lost diplomatic ground to make up and wants to be able to strike a deal with the west over Syria and Ukraine.

Photographs of slain pilot Oleg Peshkov, left, and rescuer Alexander Pozynich are placed at a monument to Soviet Officers in Moscow Photograph: Ivan Sekretarev/AP

To this end, while Putin was angry (“a stab in the back”) and Erdogan obstinate (“everyone should respect the right of Turkey to defend its borders”), their respective foreign ministers are doing what foreign ministers do and trying to bring things back to the diplomatic track.

Analyst Pavel Felgenhauer has suggested that “further dogfights are possible during which Russian planes will attack Turkish planes in order to protect our bombers. Sea battles between the Turkish and Russian fleets are possible”.

There are striking similarities between Erdogan’s Turkey and Putin’s Russia

But in fact, the mechanisms in place to control conflict remain robust. Nato is aware that Turkey is an ally, but is not piling in to increase the tension; Russia knows that while it may have a certain moral authority in this incident, but if it turns to military pressure then Nato must back its maverick ally.

There are striking similarities between Erdogan’s Turkey and Putin’s Russia, not least their ability and propensity to move conflicts into the covert arena. While Russia’s intervention in Syria may have cynical intent, the Turks are acting in support of their national interests in Syria with equal ruthlessness.

Ankara is often guilty of neglecting attacks on Isis and hitting the Kurds (who are in so many ways the most effective force against the jihadists) instead, smuggling weapons in the guise of humanitarian convoys (something we saw the Russians doing in Ukraine), and being willing to support groups which are often jihadist in their own terms. Turkish military intelligence organisation (MIT) is every bit as cynically opportunist as the Russian military spy agency (GRU), and Erdogan every bit as erratic, brutal and ambitious as Putin.

Vladimir Putin speaks during a press conference in Ankara, Turkey in 2014. Photograph: Sasha Mordovets/Getty Images

As the analysts Fiona Hill and Kemal Kirişci have put it, “the personalities and political styles of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Russian president Vladimir Putin seemed to complement if not mirror each other” such that these “similarities … have now come into play in a dramatic way.”

While the overt clashes may be headed off by the usual machinery of diplomacy, both countries – with large, extensive, secretive and brutal intelligence apparatuses and a history of working with both gangsters and terrorists – may well instead simply transfer these tensions to the covert arena.
Analysis Despite sound and fury Putin wary of letting jet incident spiral out of control
Announcements made by Moscow include banning of some Turkish poultry imports – hardly a suggestion of bellicose intent
Read more

In Syria itself, the Russians are likely to put greater emphasis on attacking those groups under Ankara’s patronage. A strike on a Turkish aid convoy may be the first manifestation of this.

Meanwhile, the Turks will presumably arm and encourage those groups most able to give the Russians a bloody nose.
In this way, what wasn’t really a proxy war before is likely to become one.

Meanwhile, Moscow may put greater emphasis on countering Turkey’s efforts to establish regional influence (Azerbaijan is an obvious place of contention) and could support problematic non-state actors inside Turkey, from Kurds to criminals (at least, those criminals not already tied to the Turkish state).

This is a conflict that Ankara triggered and while it is being managed it is not going to go away. Nor is it just going to become another chapter in the histories of Russo-Ottoman rivalry. Expect to see this play out in snide, deniable, but nonetheless bitter actions for months to come.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 12:09

The clear high definition videos released so quickly by the turkis after the downing of the russian jet has raised suspicions right from the beginning. That it was not the usual cell phone videos was very obvious from the video quality itself.

Lindsey Hilsum ‏@lindseyhilsum Nov 24
How come a Turkish TV crew was in the right place, filming in the right direction as Russian plane shot down? Lucky? Or tipped off?
1,327 retweets 718 likes

Sergey Kofanov ‏@SergeyKofanov Nov 24
@lindseyhilsum Was it a Turkish crew ot a rebel crew? The plane fell in Syria, not in Turkey.
5 retweets 4 likes

Lindsey Hilsum ‏@lindseyhilsum Nov 24
@SergeyKofanov Professional Turkish TV filmed from Turkish side. Rebels took some shots from Syrian side.
RETWEETS 121 Likes 61

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Nov 2015 12:13

seems to be way too many oil transport or storage areas .... place must be really rich in oil..this airstrike barely damaged 10% of it.

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 12:16

sultan er-dog-an needs any excuses so that the joneses can come with their 'nice gear'.
to teach em russkies a lesson & put upstart putin in place
if that fails despite best efforts of chultan er-dawg then maybe self-inflicted wound ?
we have seen terror strike in paris.
will al-ciaada do a favor in NY or DC so that obama & poodle can
come huffing & puffing to syria ?
we need to activate thread for future 'nato tricks to save isis/al-c'
anything to save isis.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Nov 2015 12:18

Singha ,Better to use Cluster Bomb over these Oil Depot

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 12:20

you do realize that the regime is also supplied from this very same oil infra.
so strikes have to be selective.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Nov 2015 12:27

Now he is singing a different Tune , Says he was not aware it was Russian jet and that Turkish jet should not be shot for Violating Syrian Airspace

Turkey vows ‘measures’ if its jet downed when violating Syrian airspace

http://tass.ru/en/world/839771

MOSCOW, November 27. /TASS/. Turkey’s authorities have given interviews with western TV channels in an attempt to justify the destruction of the Russian warplane in the Syrian airspace earlier this week.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu expressed regrets about the incident with downing the Russian Su-24 jet but their statements also contained threats.

In an interview with France 24 TV channel on Thursday, Erdogan said Turkey "does not want tensions with Russia." "Had we known it was a Russian plane we may have acted differently," he said.

The Turkish president said he did not consider the incident as the source of tension and called for continuing cooperation with Russia.

In an interview with CNN, Erdogan warned Moscow that Turkey would take steps if its warplane was downed by the Russian S-400 missile system in case of violation of the Syrian airspace.

On Tuesday, a Turkish F-16 fighter jet brought down a Russian Sukhoi Su-24M bomber, which, Ankara alleges, violated the country’s airspace near the Syrian border. The Russian Defense Ministry said the warplane was flying over Syrian territory and had never violated Turkey’s airspace.

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that the attack on the Russian bomber would have "serious consequences" for Russian-Turkish relations. Action by the Turkish air force against the military jet, taking part in anti-terrorist operations in Syria and posing no threat to Turkey, was "a stab in Russia’s back", Putin said.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Nov 2015 12:28

habal wrote:you do realize that the regime is also supplied from this very same oil infra.
so strikes have to be selective.

As long as those are under IS control its better to destroy it irrespective to where they supply to Assad or Turkey

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 12:30

it doesn't belong to isis, it belongs to syrian state. So easier said than done.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Nov 2015 12:36

Sultan-a-pig.Dogs are man's best friends!
Enjoy this piece about the Moron-of-Cam.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 50436.html

Tom Peck's Sketch: Let's bomb Isis, says Cameron. We can't make matters any worse.
The Prime Minister outlines the case for Syrian air strikes: It can't do any harm.

Tom Peck Parliamentary Sketch Writer
David Cameron makes the case for bombing Isis in Syria PA

With Alton Towers still closed, why not get yourself over to Raqqa this Christmas? The “Raptor Pod”, the “Brimstone”, the “Reaper” and who knows what else all look highly likely to be open for business in the skies above Isis controlled Syria in a matter of weeks if not days. And if our Prime Minister is to believed, unlike at Alton Towers, the risk of severe injury is all but non-existent.

As David Cameron addressed the House of Commons to make the case for British fighter jets joining France, the US, Russia, Turkey and the rest in airstrikes against Isis, one of his more curious arguments was that it would in fact “reduce civilian casualties.” Yes, he said, Britain has “the most accurate weapons known to man.” Britain’s “Brimstone Precision Defence System” (which, like the Raptor and the Reaper, turned out not to be rollercoasters) is something that “not even the Americans have” - as the staff of medical charity field hospitals throughout Afghanistan will attest. As such, it would seem, any reluctance on Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else’s part to get bombing without delay would only make the world a more violent place.

“The risk of inaction is greater than the risk of action,” Cameron said, quoting the report of the Joint Intelligence Committee. “The UK is already in the top tier of countries ISIS is targeting.”

This would not, he said, be like Iraq, or Afghanistan, or his own mess, Libya. And crucially, unlike the case for bombing the other Assad-controlled half of the country, which he made equally persuasively two years ago, this time there would be a “transition.” This is an “Isil first strategy,” he said. No Jihadi left behind.

When Jeremy Corbyn rose to reply he had, he said, “seven questions” to ask. Eyes widened for a second in legitimate fear that the Leader of the Opposition might be about to voice the concerns of Derek from Harrogate about the peace keeping capabilities of the Free Syrian Army. But in the end all seven questions were Corbyn’s own, and some hours later the Hansard transcribers had miraculously managed to whittle them down to sixteen, and which could all be summed up thus: “How is this going to make things any better?”

The Prime Minister replied that it could not make things any worse. The Joint Intelligence Committee, the head of MI5, even Derek from Harrogate are all in agreement that “we are already at the very highest level we could be when it comes to threats from ISIL.” There is nothing we can do to make matters worse.
Read more
How David Cameron set out his case for war in Syria

That, in the end, Britain is committed to a solution that cannot involve Assad, and Russia, its would be partners in the bombing are committed to the opposite, is a problem that can wait til later. The “moderate Sunnis” will sort all that out, even if there remains no real idea about how many of them there are, where they are, or as Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury, Lab) pointed out: ‘The Russians will surely continue to bomb them.” An interjection which the Conservative back benches for some reason found hilarious.
Read more

Chairman Mao's Little Red Book offers a gift to the Tories
David Cameron under fire over 'magical' 70,000 Syrian moderates figure
Britain in 'top tier' of Isis targets, says Cameron

If the ghost of Blair lingered, given form by the constant talk of “lessons learned”, of “stable transition”, George W Bush made an appearance too, channeled both faultlessly and predictably by Dr Liam Strangelove Fox MP (North Somerset, Conservative). “The question is whether we confront them over there, or, increasingly, take the risk of having to confront them over here,” he warned, an unarguable strategy proven true on countless occasions, and never moreso through the success of the pursuit of imagined Islamists in Iraq in preventing four Yorkshiremen from blowing themselves up on the London underground.

Terrorists, of course, seek to terrorise, and in Susan Elan Jones (Clywd South, Labour), they have clearly claimed a victim. “The attacks that happened in Paris could easily have happened in north Wales,” she pointed out.

Fear ye not, Susan. Pay your money, ride the Raptor. It’ll be over by Christmas.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Nov 2015 12:52

X-posted from the UKR td.
In the aftermath of the Russian intervention in Syria,and the Turkish conspiracy with ISIS being revealed,the importance of Putin's Crimean gambit cannot be more relevant today. It is a most vital strategic piece of territory from where the entire Black Sea and its littoral nations can be controlled.The huge naval base at Sevastopol looms ever more important as the home for both Russia's Black Sea fleet and its Meditt. task forces,operating out of Latakia.While the extreme possibility of Turkey trying to prevent Russian warships and subs transiting the Bosphorous cannot be ruled out,a huge build up in infrastructure at Tartus and Latakia and other Russian air bases,etc. in Syria is taking place.Russia is going to be firmly entrenched in Syria for years to come.Any hopes by the Yanquis,EUropeans and their Turkish bumchums that Russia can be forced out of Syria and Assad easily removed and replaced,is wishful thinking. The Russian borders now begin in Syria,not the Crimea.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/ ... 31986.html

Why Russia Is Expanding Its Naval Base in Syria

By Matthew Bodner
Sep. 21 2015

VKRussia in recent weeks has wrong-footed Israel, the U.S. and Europe by beefing up its supply of military hardware to the Syrian government.

The Russian military is expanding its tiny naval facility at Tartus on the Syrian coast to handle bigger warships and transport vessels amid a general buildup of Russian forces in territory controlled by Syrian President Bashar Assad, the Kommersant newspaper reported Monday, citing military sources.

The news broke as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew with his military and intelligence chiefs to Moscow on Monday to meet with President Vladimir Putin and discuss ways to prevent accidental clashes of Russian and Israeli forces operating in Syria.

Russia in recent weeks has wrong-footed Israel, the U.S. and Europe by beefing up its supply of military hardware to the Syrian government. News reports have alleged that Russia has deployed forces such as Su-30 fighter jets, tanks, armored vehicles and troops to a government-controlled airfield in Latakia.

To better sustain and supply both its own forces and the Syrian government’s, Russia has deployed some 1,700 military specialists to its small naval repair station at Tartus, 90 kilometers to the south of Latakia — a dramatic increase in personnel at a facility that until recently was staffed by a handful of military men and civilian contractors, Kommersant reported.

“They are outfitting and guarding the facility, and are restructuring the dock,” an unidentified soldier stationed at Tartus told Kommersant, adding that the specialists should be rotated out of Syria in three months.

This was confirmed by an unidentified source in Russia’s General Staff, the military’s highest command authority, Kommersant reported. The General Staff source said that the expansion of Tartus into a full-scale naval base was not connected with any imminent Russian intervention in Syria’s civil war.

Instead, after its expansion, “[Tartus] will simply be able to accommodate first- and second-rank ships from the Russian Mediterranean flotilla,” the source said, referring to the Russian designation for ships ranging in size from large cruisers to destroyers and large landing ships and transports.

This points to a two-pronged vision for the future of Russia’s Syrian naval outpost — currently Russia’s only pit-stop in the Mediterranean, said Dr. Theodore Karasik, a UAE-based military and geopolitical expert.

“The Russian port in Tartus, although small, is a main entry point for Russian equipment to support the Syrian government,” Karasik said. “[However], Russia seeks to expand Tartus not only because of the required throughput necessary to help the Syrian government, but also to increase Moscow’s presence in the eastern Mediterranean.”
Historical Foothold

As the destination of the so-called Syrian Express — a Russian naval supply route from the Black Sea Fleet headquarters in Sevastopol — Tartus has long served as a kind of beachhead for Russian arms and equipment deliveries to Syria.

Moscow has since 1956 supplied weapons to the Syrian government, and by 1991, the total value of Soviet arms deliveries to Damascus had reached $26 billion, according to Kommersant. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, arms sales have continued, though their value is unclear.

Heavy equipment such as Bastion coastal defense missiles, T-80 battle tanks, and Su-27 fighters have been delivered to the Syrian government since 2010, Kommersant reported, citing an unidentified source at state arms export agency Rosoboronexport.

Tartus has been an entry point for Russian arms deliveries to Syria since 1971, when it was leased to Moscow, but the base was doubly significant for serving as a home away from home for the Soviet Mediterranean flotilla.

But this ended with the fall of the Soviet Union, when the Russian military was forced to retrench, and the 1990s saw the scale of operations at Tartus drastically diminish.

“It hasn’t been used much, nor has it been properly renovated,” said Yury Barmin, a Russian expert in the Middle East arms trade and politics. “Tartus can’t accommodate any of the major Russian warships, which is why upgrading it makes sense.”

By the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Tartus was manned by only a handful of Russian military servicemen and civilian contractors, and the single remaining floating dock could only receive the smallest of Russia’s ocean-going vessels.

Russia has been looking to rebuild its presence at Tartus since at least 2010, when the former head of the navy Vladimir Vysotsky unveiled plans to equip the facility to handle ships as big as Russia’s aircraft carrier the Admiral Kuznetsov.

That work was meant to be completed by 2012, and be carried out in two phases — first, establishing a military base, and then expanding the naval facilities. The breakout of the Syrian civil war stifled these plans, and only now that Russia is stepping up support for Assad’s regime have they been dusted off.

“The base would offer Russian military equipment easy access to Syria, because right now Russian landing ships primarily use the port at [nearby] Latakia, a province under constant rebel offensive,” Barmin said.

Russia’s decision to overhaul the Tartus facility and expand it into a naval base for larger vessels speaks not only to Moscow’s intention to provide significant levels of military aid to the Syrian government, but make good on its promise to project power into the Mediterranean.

In July, Russia announced updates to its national naval doctrine that called for a return to more frequent patrols and operations in areas such as the Mediterranean, where the Soviet Union once had a formidable presence.

But in order to support these operations, which will be conducted by the Black Sea Fleet out of Sevastopol, with occasional support from the Northern Fleet, Russia needs ports in the Mediterranean to dock ships for refueling and maintenance.

“Expanding the Tartus facility and turning it into a naval base would provide the Russian fleet with a logistical advantage sparing it constant trips back to the Black Sea through the Bosphorus,” Barmin said.
(*..... and avoiding transiting the Bosphorous. Russian naval vessels can arrive from the Baltic and Northern fleets.)

Although Tartus appears to be the primary focus, it isn’t the only place that Russia is looking to base its ships, Karasik said.

“Already, the Russian Defense Ministry is deep into making plans for other ports around the Mediterranean, notably in North Cyprus, but also maritime access in Egypt, in Libya under a new national government, Greece and perhaps Italy,” Karasik said.

“Clearly, the Kremlin seeks a maritime hub system in the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and the Gulf of Oman,” Karasik added.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 13:04

Richard Bejtlich ‏@taosecurity Nov 25
Awesome historical context on Turkey's Su-24 shoot down by @WWIPhD and @warstudies own @WWATMD via @WarOnTheRocks. http://warontherocks.com/2015/11/12-oth ... -russians/ …

RETWEETS 4 Likes 5

12 OTHER CLASHES AND CLOSE CALLS WITH THE RUSSIANS

12 OTHER CLASHES AND CLOSE CALLS WITH THE RUSSIANS

MARK STOUT AND B.J. ARMSTRONG NOVEMBER 25, 2015

The shootdown yesterday of a Russian aircraft by a Turkish F-16 is a worrisome development, but historically speaking, incidents involving the United States or NATO countries and Soviet or Russian forces have been fairly common. These include ground, naval, and air incidents. Indeed, there was a long tradition of the Soviet Union shooting at aircraft and people who entered their territory or even come close to it. Even in the post-Soviet era there have been similar incidents with Russian forces. As bad as these events can be, they have yet to lead to war and are usually either swept under the rug or dealt with on a diplomatic level.

Consider 12 of the more notable confrontations:

1. In November 1951, Soviet fighters shot down a U.S. P2V Neptune over the Sea of Japan, 18 miles from the Soviet coast. All ten crewmen were lost though the Navy did not declare them dead until 1952. The Navy publicly claimed that the aircraft was engaged in a weather reconnaissance flight and only after the end of the Cold War did it admit that the plane was on a signals intelligence collection mission.

2. In March 1953, seven Royal Air Force crewmen were killed when a Soviet MiG-15 fighter shot down an Avro Lincoln B2 reportedly on a training mission in the Berlin Corridor.

3. In September 1958, four Soviet MiGs intercepted and took turns shooting at an American C-130 with tail number 60528 which was on a reconnaissance mission over Soviet Armenia. 60528 crashed and the 17 crewmembers were lost. Because of the classified nature of the mission, the U.S. government was initially reluctant to ask the Soviets about the aircraft. When it finally did, a week and a half later, the Soviet Union denied all knowledge of the incident. The National Security Agency and its partners, however, knew the Soviets were lying because they had collected SIGINT on the intercept. It was not until the 1990s that Russian President Boris Yeltsin released Soviet-era records on the incident. The NSA has subsequently released its own materials, including audio recordings of the Soviet pilots as they intercepted the doomed American plan. Today a C-130 painted with tail number 60528 is a centerpiece of NSA’s National Vigilance Park.

4. On Mayday in 1960, a CIA U-2 reconnaissance plane piloted by Francis Gary Powers was shot down near Sverdlovsk in the center of the Soviet Union. The incident proved a major embarrassment to the United States. Not knowing that Powers had survived, President Dwight Eisenhower denied it had been a spy flight. He was soon shown to have lied, when the Soviets produced Powers. When Eisenhower refused to apologize, the Soviet delegation walked out of a planned summit meeting in Paris just as it was due to begin. The negotiation for Powers’ release is the plotline of the new Tom Hanks thriller Bridge of Spies.

5. In September 1961, just a month after the completion of the Berlin Wall, two Western German F-84F Thunderstreaks strayed into East German airspace as they participated in a NATO exercise called CHECKMATE. With Soviet fighters in hot pursuit, French and American air controllers in Berlin directed the pilots to dash to Berlin instead of turning into the pursuers who were between them and the West German border. Though, by treaty, no West German forces were allowed in Berlin, the F-84F’s safely landed at the French-controlled Tegel Airport in West Berlin. Rumors circulated afterwards that the planes were somehow smuggled out of Berlin, but in actuality, the French buried them. The Soviet Union protested the incident and the West German pilots and their squadron commander found themselves relieved.

6. On May 10 and 11, 1967 the destroyer USS Walker, engaged in a U.S.-Japanese anti-submarine warfare exercise in the Sea of Japan, was twice bumped by two different Soviet destroyers. In one of the incidents, the Walker was holed in the bow above the waterline. In an exchange of diplomatic demarches, the United States accused the Soviets of harassment and the Soviets responded that the U.S.-Japanese maneuvers “close to the Soviet shores cannot be regarded as anything else but a premeditated organized provocative military demonstration.” Historian David Winkler notes that the incident became a political issue in the United States and even led House Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford to suggest that the U.S. Navy should be authorized to fire in future such incidents. The Lyndon Johnson administration chose a different route, however, and the next year proposed opening negotiations with the Soviets which four years later led to the Incidents at Sea Agreement.

7. In November 1970, the British aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal collided with a Soviet Kotlin class guided missile destroyer, which had been shadowing it off the coast of Crete. Seven Soviet sailors were thrown overboard by the impact and two of them were lost. The British ship was holed above the waterline but was able to continue participating in the NATO exercise LIME JUG.

8. Events on Turkish borders are not new either. In August 1982, Turkey and the Soviet Union exchanged diplomatic protests after Soviet border guards shot and killed two Turkish border guards in Cildir, Turkey. The Soviets claimed that the Turks had crossed into Soviet territory and been killed in a gunfight.

9. In March 1985, a Soviet sentry shot and killed U.S. Army Major Arthur Nicholson, a member of the U.S. Military Liaison Mission in East Germany. Nicholson and a sergeant had been watching a Soviet exercise when the shooting took place, but they were not in a restricted zone at the time. Following the incident General Glenn Otis told his Soviet counterpart that the United States believed the killing was approved and ordered by the Russians. A Soviet diplomat was expelled from the United States and plans for a joint U.S./Soviet celebration for the 40th anniversary of the end of WWII were cancelled.

10. In February 1988, two Soviet ships bumped an American Aegis cruiser and a Spruance-class destroyer conducting “freedom of navigation operations” in the Black Sea. The Pentagon reported that shortly before the incident, one of the Soviet ships radioed to the Americans “Soviet ships have orders to prevent violation of territorial waters….I am authorized to strike your ship with one of ours.”

11. In July 1990, the Norwegian government protested to the Soviet government after five Soviet soldiers penetrated 110 yards into Norway chasing a Norwegian fisherman whom they said had been poaching on the Soviet side of the border. The Soviets shot at the fisherman but he was not harmed.

12. In February 1992, the Baton Rouge, an American nuclear submarine collided with a Soviet nuclear submarine off the Russian naval base at Murmansk. There were no casualties and neither boat sustained serious damage both sides agreed that the incident took place more than 12 miles off the Russian coast. However, the Russians accused the Americans of being within restricted waters.

Mark Stout is a Senior Editor at War on the Rocks. He is the Director of the MA Program in Global Security Studies and the Graduate Certificate Program in Intelligence at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Arts and Sciences in Washington, D.C.

B.J. Armstrong is a Senior Editor at War on the Rocks. He is a naval officer and a researcher with the Laughton Naval History Unit in the Department of War Studies, King’s College, London. Armstrong, an award winning historian, is editor of the 21st Century Foundations series from the Naval Institute Press, which includes his books 21st Century Sims: Innovation, Education, and Leadership for the Modern Era and 21st Century Mahan: Sound Military Conclusions for the Modern Era.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 27 Nov 2015 13:12

Satya_anveshi wrote:Now that Putin did not take the bait and continuing with his usual program in turn just helping Turkey expose itself as to how deep it is in bed with ISIS, turkey is now shifting gears and pushing for ISIS as fait accompli.

Turkey is legitimizing ISIS if one reads its intelligence chief's statements.

I remarked that west will also try to do it in the coming days. It did not take that long. This piece of trash from Spiegel paints ISIS as "Rational Monster."

I guess we will be reading more of such things in coming days.

Spiegel article is a reiteration of a more sophisticated argument for the removal of Assad which has surfaced recently. Still, it can't avoid the basic flaw that there are, in effect, no such things as moderate anti-arab rebels.

The reference to Lenin's strategy being used by ISIS is interesting--the article fails to draw the obvious lesson: Lenin relied on "moderate" factions such as Kerensky's to provide a respectable alternative to the Czar and then completed the takeover by his minority Bolsheviks by a putsch against Kerensky.

The story was the same in anti-Shah revolution in Iran, anti-somoza revolution in Nicaragua, also inChina, and probably other places.

Even real moderates don't have a chance with a small and disciplined extremist force, what to speak of fake moderates in Syria.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 27 Nov 2015 13:19

habal wrote:it doesn't belong to isis, it belongs to syrian state. So easier said than done.

habal ji, given that the US uses the exact same logic for not bombing Syrian Oil assets under ISIS for one year but bombing their water and electricity facilities, I think Austin saar is right. ISIS, the rebels, the Turks, the Saudis and the Americans have more to fret over these lost oil facilities.

Syria, whenever, it stabilizes and in whatsoever form (multiple countries?), these resources will be split and a major rebuild will have to be undertaken. The Oil wells and oil storage facility will just get added to the list.

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 13:34

deejayji certain tankers meant for oil trade with turkey should be destroyed. baaki infra is tough call, destroying them is adding to public debt after war is over.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 14:05

Turkey has a very different objective

WikiLeaks ‏@wikileaks Nov 14
Turkey pushing for NATO help to occupy Northern Syria five days ago. NATO not happy then. But now? http://atimes.com/2015/11/german-genera ... -in-syria/ … #NATOArticle5

RETWEETS 293 Likes 153

German General: NATO Article 5 won’t apply to Turkey’s buffer zone in Syria

BY CHRISTINA LIN on NOVEMBER 14, 2015 in AT OPINION, MIDDLE EAST

In a Nov. 9 interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said a ground forces operation in Syria could be possible to establish a buffer zone, but Turkey would not conduct it alone.

“[A] ground forces [campaign] is something which we have to talk [about] together and share…there’s a need of an integrated strategy, including an air campaign and ground troops.” Davutoglu added that Turkey alone cannot take on this burden.[1]

A Turkish security source said such an operation is unlikely without support from the UN Security Council or NATO Council.

Ret. Gen. Harld Kujat
Ret. German Gen. Harald Kujat
Interestingly, almost exactly a year ago on Oct. 8, 2014, Germany’s former Chief of General Staff and NATO chairman of the Military Committee, General Harald Kujat (ret.), criticized that Turkey is trying to drag NATO into a Syrian war for its own parochial interests.[2]

In an interview on “Anne Will” ARD-TV broadcast, and stating almost the same words that Davutoglu said on CNN, General Kujat said “look, that’s what Turkey wants to provoke [NATO Article 5]. Therefore it keeps saying ‘we can’t do that alone, others have to participate.’”

In face of then ISIS massacre of Kobane Kurds, he continued bluntly: “Turkey basically wants to drag NATO into this situation because the actual goal of Turkey is to neutralize Assad…ISIS’s actions and what’s happening to the Kurds are subsidiary…and it has to be clearly said that an ally who behaves like this doesn’t deserve the protection of this alliance, an ally who doesn’t intervene for protection in a such tragic situation doesn’t deserve protection himself.”

The former NATO general recommended removing Patriot batteries from Turkey to send a signal, and in August 2015 they were removed.[3]

Regarding the Patriot missiles, German newspaper Frankfurter Rundschau said: “Politically, the mission did not serve anything. The Turkish government is more concerned with its own interests, not with those of the alliance.”[4]

On whether Turkey could invoke the mutual defense clause if its military were deployed to Syrian territory to set up a buffer zone, General Kujat said “if Turkish troops were to conduct operations in Syria without Syria’s permission and without a UN mandate and then be attacked this would never amount to a casus foederis (Article 5).”[5]

Thus, in the absence of a NATO Article 5, would Turkey be able to acquire a UNSC mandate for a buffer zone/no-fly zone similar to Libya?

That would likely depend on whether the buffer zone is really for humanitarian purposes.

Aleppo as Turkey’s 82nd province?

On a practical level, the buffer zone in Syria’s Aleppo region is an illusive haven. By definition a safe zone maintains neutrality in a military conflict, but the positioning of armed opposition groups in the safe zone will turn the area into a prime target.

Moreover, claims that on 10 August Turkish military forces entered the planned zone in Syria along with the Sultan Murat Brigade, which is composed of Turkmens, presents a worrying picture when taken in conjunction with pro-government media that proclaimed Aleppo as the 82nd province of Turkey.[6]

On 5 August Turkish newspaper Takvim featured a map of the buffer zone that includes Aleppo, Idlib and the north of Latakia to be under Turkey’s control as an eventual 82nd province.[7]

takvim-5-august-2015

According to Hurriyet Daily, Erdogan is using the Turkmen card again especially when nationalist sentiments are on the rise, so that “any attack on our Turkmen brothers in the safe zone could easily spark a military clash and drag Turkey into war.”[8]

However, the article ended “do we really want to fight for an 82nd province?”

And this is a serious issue for consideration not just for the people in Turkey, but for US and coalition forces that are considering a Syrian “buffer zone.” Do they want to risk their troops lives and fight for Erdogan’s neo-Ottoman ambitions for an 82nd province?

Moreover, do they want to be complicit in carving out a safe haven in northwest Syria for Erdogan’s Army of Conquest that consists of militant groups from Central Asia, China and Russia?

Safe haven for Eurasian militants?

According to the director of Syrian Observatory for Human Rights Rami Abdul Rahman, there are at least 2,000 fighters from Chechnya, Dagestan and other Caucasus regions operating with Al Nusra, and “they are concentrated in Idlib, Aleppo, and Latakia provinces”—where Erdogan has called for a buffer zone.[9]

Counterterrorism experts also reveal Chinese Turkistan Islamic Party, Uzbek Imam Bukhari Jamaat and Katibat Tawhid wal Jihad have planted themselves in Idlib. In Aleppo, a May 2015 USAID report on Central Asian fighters in Syria, referred to three Uzbek militant groups allied with Al Nusra as “Aleppo Uzbeks”: Imam al-Bukhoriy Brigade, Uzbek Brigade of Jabhat al Nusra, and Seyfullah Shishani Jamaat.[10]

Now, various intelligence sources estimate there are around 5,000 Uzbek, 2,000 Chechens and more than 1,000 Chinese militants in Syria.[11]

The Syrian army has been fighting these militants on behalf of Central Asian states, China and Russia—all members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). However, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are now weakening regime forces with supplies of anti-tank TOW weapons.

As such, a UNSC resolution for a buffer zone is unlikely from China and Russia, as it would provide a base for their militants from which to launch attacks on the homeland.

Without NATO and UNSC backing, Turkey would stand alone against these Eurasian states’ interests to deny Syria as a haven for their militant groups. Any escalation of the conflict would only draw in these Eurasian powers to fortify ground forces that are helping them fight their militants—that means the Syrian Kurds and the Syrian army.

Going forward, Turkey—still a dialogue partner of the SCO—should seek a reset with the members, and work with other world powers to de-escalate the conflict and restore regional stability. Vienna II and G-20 meeting may be good places to start.

[1] Ugur Ergan, “Turkey: Syria land operation possible but not alone”, Hurriyet Daily, 11 November 2015, http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey ... sCatID=352

[2] “Former NATO official: Turkey wants to drag NATO into Syria https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UjQjlM8jeI

[3] Metin Gurcan, “US plays politics with Patriot missile removal”, Al Monitor, 20 August 2015, http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... rsial.html#

[4] http://www.dw.com/tr/patriotlar-siyasi- ... a-18652882

[5] Sven Pohle, “How NATO’s Article 5 could work in the case of Turkey”, Deutsche Welle, 9 October 2014, http://www.dw.com/en/how-natos-article- ... a-17983762

[6] Selin Nasi, “Conquering Aleppo?” Hurriyet Daily, 18 August 2015, http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/conque ... sCatID=396

[7] http://www.sabah.com.tr/gundem/2015/08/05/yeni-sehir

http://www.takvim.com.tr/guncel/2015/08/05/yeni-sehir

[8] http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/conque ... sCatID=396

[9] “In Syria, Russia is chasing Chechens once again”, The National, 7 October 2015, http://www.thenational.ae/world/europe/ ... once-again

[10] Jacob Zenn, “Al Qaeda-aligned central Asian militants separate from Islamic State-aligned IMU in Afghanistan”, Terrorism Monitor, Volume 13, Issue 11, 29 March 2015, http://www.jamestown.org/programs/tm/si ... kT9aYSaLlI ; Noah Tucker, “Central Asian Involvement in the Conflict in Syria and Iraq: Drivers and Responses”, US Agency for International Development, 4 May 2015, https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/fil ... iaIraq.pdf Chinese al Qaeda group TIP fighting in Syria https://news.siteintelgroup.com/tag/31.html ; Chinese jihadists equipped with advanced anti-tank missiles that will be a concern for China https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadis ... -homs.html

[11]http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_ttn ... kUVK4SaLlI; http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/isil-c ... sCatID=341

Dr. Christina Lin is a Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS-Johns Hopkins University. She is the author of “The New Silk Road: China’s Energy Strategy in the Greater Middle East” (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), and a former director for China policy at the US Department of Defense.

The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the view of Asia Times

Bhurishrava · Post by **Bhurishrava** » 27 Nov 2015 14:07

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkey ... sCatID=352

Turkey is not flying planes into Syria anymore.

The Turkish army has suspended flights over Syria as part of an ongoing joint military campaign with the United States against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) after it shot down a Russian jetfighter, sparking an unprecedented crisis between Ankara and Moscow.

Sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, stressed that the suspension of the Turkish jetfighters’ participation in the U.S.-led military operations against ISIL was in fact a mutual decision taken with Russia, which also halted its aerial campaigns near the Turkish border.

But russia says this -

'destroyed' Syria rebels in area where jet brought down

from here - http://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-destr ... 19543.html#

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 14:12

somebody learned very very quickly not to eff with putin

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 27 Nov 2015 14:27

Chetak ji, nice catch that wikileaks article.

So, NATO is being played by Erodogan to help create Turkey's 82nd province extending all the way to Aleppo. Erodogan has played both the Sunni militants and NATO or even better US all along. Not only that he personally made money while doing it. How smart can one be? Bit too smart perhaps.

So, how does the US'oles of GOTUS feel - like a used c*****m! Well played the new Ottoman emperor!

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 14:37

i don't know whether turkey learnt a lesson. Cause even though words are emitting from turdogan's mouth, puppeteer clearly is elsewhere ..

ofcourse if turdogan loses face in the process, cute pentagon and NATO etc will immidiately wash hands. If he seems succeasful they will engineer narrative in their favor.

Russian analyst John Helmer says “Turkey never makes a military move without getting Pentagon approval first.” More importantly, did Washington plan and orchestrate Ankara’s aggression against Russia - letting it pull the trigger to execute its policy.

http://www.rense.com/general96/washorderruss.html

Washington has no effective way to challenge Putin’s righteous mission - waging Security Council authorized real war on terrorism, Syrian government’s request for help on its territory, acting in full accord with international law, polar opposite US phony war, supporting ISIS and other terrorist groups as proxy imperial foot soldiers, not combatting them.

ofc

Bhurishrava · Post by **Bhurishrava** » 27 Nov 2015 14:41

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/ ... y9iipFv.97

Interesting from the Kurds. They are certainly opposed to the turks.

He added that the PYD had however not increased its contacts with Moscow since Russia started bombing Syria two months ago.
"It is just ordinary contact... we have a representative in Moscow who relays information from them. But there is nothing new," he said, adding that Moscow had not offered increased support for the Kurds either.
"They don't offer and we didn't ask for it."

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 14:43

like islam has dar-ul-harb & dar-ul-islam, americans also have their own dar-ul-harb, only western EU and US, AUS, CAN, NZ come under US dar ul islam.

Asia is dar-ul-harb for pentagon, NATO. So is Eurasia. You keep fighting, we will keep provoking. If you live in peace, then we will find some new way for you to fight and cut each other throats.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 27 Nov 2015 14:43

erdo has been fuming for years against the west, perhaps he thinks he can play russia off against nato and then carve up the spoils with the saudis
and then who gives a damn about joining the EU racist pigs...

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Nov 2015 15:10

Russian Hind’s attack helicopters provide air support to Syrian ground forces against ISIS near Palmyra, Syria. ( Check the Video )

http://www.military.com:80/video/operat ... 602943001/

Looking at the video I feel even Helicopter supporting ground forces are flying 5 km plus to avoid MANPADS , I think with todays Optics and FC precision attack is possible with high altitude

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 27 Nov 2015 15:15

habal wrote:deejayji certain tankers meant for oil trade with turkey should be destroyed. baaki infra is tough call, destroying them is adding to public debt after war is over.

Thats the kind of thing tough to figure out good tanker bad tanker stuff , if they hit refiniries then they can refine the oil which means they can just sell raw crude , As long as these areas are under ISIS control its good to hit those tankers and Oil Fields etc , Can deprive them of that source of revenue.

Oil Wells generally keeps burning till you need specialised equipment to turn it off , like Kuwait showed after saddam invasion in GW1 where retreting Iraqi forces burnt most oil wells and it took years to shut it off.

There is little left of Syrian Economy any ways so Public Debt is last of concern

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 15:26

deejay wrote:Chetak ji, nice catch that wikileaks article.

So, NATO is being played by Erodogan to help create Turkey's 82nd province extending all the way to Aleppo. Erodogan has played both the Sunni militants and NATO or even better US all along. Not only that he personally made money while doing it. How smart can one be? Bit too smart perhaps.

So, how does the US'oles of GOTUS feel - like a used c*****m! Well played the new Ottoman emperor!

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 15:32

Lalmohan wrote:erdo has been fuming for years against the west, perhaps he thinks he can play russia off against nato and then carve up the spoils with the saudis
and then who gives a damn about joining the EU racist pigs...

turkey is the european paki with all the evil ramifications and jehadi liabilities, now looking for turkish version of strategic space /depth and making a grab for resources

habal · Post by **habal** » 27 Nov 2015 16:51

Syria arrives in moscow

via Linda H Badr, Facebook --
''A newborn girl born in ‪Moscow‬ was named ‪Syria‬ ... Syria carried by ‪Putin's‬ hands.
الطفلة سوريا أمل جديد يحمله پوتين بين يديه ...أمل الإنسانية والعالم أجمع......
The baby's father serves in the military and has been sent on a mission in Syria, officials said, Moskva reported....
“A new name — Syria — emerged in the capital in the third week of November,” an official from Analytics Center, Moscow's official statistics information institution told the news agency.
[V.V. Putin holding 'Syria']
https://z-1-scontent-syd1-1.xx.fbcdn.ne ... 6078_o.jpg

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 27 Nov 2015 17:53

Russia has played the SU-24 downing rationally. Any hot foot pursuit or any shoot down of Turkish planes in Turkish air space would have made Turkey invoke invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty. Invoking Article 5 is a formal declaration of war which would have allowed Turkey to close the Bosphorus to Russian shipping which in turn would have bottled up Russian naval vessels in the Mediterranean Sea i.e. Straits of Gibraltar and the Suez Canal being the 2 other outlets.

Re-supplying Russian forces in Syria would have become impossible in the quantities of supplies needed. But the S400 deployment is purely defensive and any Turkish planes downed over Syria will not invoke Article 5. Hence the Turkish air force has stopped flying over Syria!! Without NATO protection Turkey will be the clear underdog even in a conventional fight with Russia.

There were also murmurings that during the Russian takeover of Crimea a planeload of Tartars trained in Turkey were on their way to Crimea to stake their claim to Crimea which was part of the Ottoman Empire but captured by Russia more than 200 years ago. Plane turned back over the Black Sea when the airport at Simferopol was taken over by the Russians.

Bhurishrava · Post by **Bhurishrava** » 27 Nov 2015 18:10

Hear hear everone -
Erdogan speaketh -
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeas ... 56249.html
Turkey is not buying oil from ISIS.

And here is news from American `WMDs in Iraq` geniuses saying -
It is Assad`s Syria which is buying oil from ISIS. Notwithstanding the fact that Assad is Shia and ISIS is murderous against them, both of them are trading.

.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/syria-and-i ... 1448574377

Meanwhile a journalist has been jailed for publishing photos of weapons in turkey destined for secular, moderate, liberal , intelligent, friendly, cute rebels.

A Turkish prosecutor asked a court to imprison the editor-in-chief of Cumhuriyet newspaper pending trial for espionage and treason. In May, the outlet published photos of weapons it said were then transferred to Syria by Turkey’s intelligence agency.

https://www.rt.com/news/323557-turkey-a ... umhuriyet/

And Putin asks for hundredth time to let him know about these mythical creatures.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-t ... ia-n470251

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 27 Nov 2015 18:22

Apologies to whoever posted this before - there are several reasons to post in full. [url=ttp://blogs.timesofisrael.com/nato-turkey-annexation-of-north-syria-like-north-cyprus/]Interesting source and author for this article:[/url] : read all the way to see relevance to China Policy

Dr. Christina Lin is a Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS-Johns Hopkins University. She is the author of "The New Silk Road: China's Energy Strategy in the Greater Middle East" (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), and a former director for China policy at the U.S. Department of Defense
On Tuesday 24 November Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet near the Syrian border, and yet again called for another NATO emergency meeting to obtain statements of solidarity with Turkey.
Back in July, Turkey also called for an emergency NATO meeting after an ISIS attack in the Kurdish town of Suruc (that Kurds blame on collusion of Turkish police), in order to justify and legitimize its bombing campaign against the PKK and war on Turkish Kurds. Ankara was able to extract a statement from NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg: “The security of the alliance is indivisible, and we stand in strong solidarity with Turkey.” It likewise extracted a statement from the White House that Turkey had a right to defend itself and go after the Kurds, thereby giving a green light for Ankara to pulverize the PKK and alienate US key ally Syrian Kurdish militia forces, who were the most effective ground forces fighting ISIS. In September, Turkey again extracted a statement of solidarity from NATO SACEUR General Breedlove at the NATO Military Committee conference in Istanbul. In October, reports from two CHP deputies in the Turkish parliament corroborate previous testimonies that the notorious sarin gas attack at Ghouta was a false flag orchestrated by Turkish intelligence, willing to commit the war crime of sacrificing 1,300 innocent civilians to goad US into the Syrian war to topple Assad. Turkey’s unhealthy pattern as arsonist-firefighter so exasperated NATO member Germany, that in August Berlin removed its Patriot batteries from Turkey.
Can Turkey get NATO to fight for its 82nd province?
As former NATO chairman of the Military Committee, German general Harald Kujat (ret.) said in an interviewon ARD-TV last October, he criticized, “that’s what Turkey wants to provoke [NATO Article 5 on mutual defence]… Turkey basically wants to drag NATO into this situation because the actual goal of Turkey is to neutralize Assad…ISIS’s actions and what’s happening to the Kurds are subsidiary…”
Now, would NATO stand in solidarity with Erdogan as he proceeds to annex Syria’s Aleppo as Turkey’s 82ndprovince similar to northern Cyprus?
Currently, Erdogan is aggressively pushing NATO and EU to carve Syria’s Aleppo as a no-fly zone/safe zone. However, this is an illusive haven because by definition a safe zone maintains neutrality in a military conflict, and the positioning of armed opposition groups will turn the area into a prime target.
Moreover, claims that on 10 August Turkish military forces entered the planned zone in Syria along with the Turkmen Sultan Murat Brigade presents a worrying picture when taken in conjunction with pro-government media that proclaimed Aleppo as the 82nd province of Turkey.
On 5 August Turkish newspaper Takvim featured a mapof the buffer zone that includes Aleppo, Idlib and the north of Latakia to be under Turkey’s control as an eventual 82nd province.
Turkey's 82nd province, Takvim-5-August-2015
Turkey’s 82nd province, Takvim-5-August-2015
According to Hurriyet Daily, Erdogan is using the Turkmen card again especially when nationalist sentiments are on the rise, so that “any attack on our Turkmen brothers in the safe zone could easily spark a military clash and drag Turkey into war.”
This is evidenced recently when Turkey extended sovereignty over northern Syria and issued stern warnings to Russia regarding bombing Syrian Turkmen villages, right before proceeding to shoot down the Russian jet fighter in hot pursuit over Chechen jihadists in northern Syria.
According to the director of Syrian Observatory for Human Rights Rami Abdul Rahman, there are at least 2,000 fighters from Chechnya, Dagestan and other Caucasus regions operating with Al Nusra, and “they are concentrated in Idlib, Aleppo, and Latakia provinces”—where Erdogan has called for a buffer zone. These militants are also part of Turkey’s Army of Conquest that Ankara dubs “moderate rebels.”
Counter-terror expert Jacob Zenn assessed that the “rebels may have enough resources to establish a de-facto state in northwestern Syria led by JN [Jabhat-al-Nusra] and supported by several Central Asian militas.” This corroborates the 2012 Defense Intelligence Agencyreport of Turkey and Arab Gulf states’ desire to carve out a salafist statelet in Syria east of Assad-controlled territory in order to put pressure on his regime.
With its base in the Idlib governorate, the rebel coalition now has a direct supply line open from Turkey’s Hatay Province next to Idlib, further expanded by the new proposed Aleppo buffer zone. Hatay province, located on the coast north of Latakia, was originally part of Syria according to the French Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon, but Turkey showed interest in the area with its large Turkish-speaking community and in 1936 pushed for Hatay’s “reunification” with Turkey. In 1939 Turkey annexed Hatay.
Hatay province, adjacent to Aleppo, Idlib and northern Latakia
Hatay province, adjacent to Aleppo, Idlib and northern Latakia
In 1974, Turkish forces also invaded and captured approximately 40% of Cyprus and proceeded to expel Greek Cypriots. About 160,000 to 200,000 Greek Cypriots that consisted of 82% of northern Cyprus population became refugees as they fled at the word of the approaching Turkish army.
occypied_cyprus_sm_mapThe occupation of northern Cyprus is viewed as illegal under international law, and Turkey is the only country that recognizes the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Now it appears Turkey is once again expanding its sovereignty to its neighborhood, over northern Syria via an attempted no-fly zone, as well as over Kurdistan in northern Iraq.
While Russian jetfighters are flying over Syrian territory at the invitation of the sovereign government of Syria, Turkish jetfighters are flying over Iraqi territory to bomb Kurdish rebels without the consent of the Iraqi government, prompting the Arab League to issue astatement on 4 August condemning Turkey’s violation of Iraqi sovereignty.
In 2011, when Turkey again violated Iraqi and Kurdish territory, in an interview with CNN spokesman for Kurdish Regional Government Kawa Mahmoud said, “We always emphasize that shelling Iraqi border is inconsistent with international conventions and good neighborly relations, and we consider it as intervention and disregard for the sovereignty of the Kurdish and Iraqi territory…the bombings directly affect the infrastructure of the region of (Iraqi) Kurdistan.”
Now that Turkey has shot down Russian planes over northern Syria, Erdogan has given a green light for Russian and Iraqi jetfighters to shoot down Turkish planes over Iraq. As China and India are also contemplating joining the Russian coalition, this would complicate the situation in both Syria and Iraq considerably.
Turkey transforming NATO from a value-based to interest-based alliance?
Finally, as NATO member Turkey is transforming from a secular, democratic system to one of an increasingly Islamist and autocratic presidential system under Erdogan, it appears the alliance is also transforming from a value-based alliance of human right, democracy, and rule of law to one that is increasingly interest-based.
As Erdogan embarks on expanding Turkey’s sovereignty through Islamist proxies in the Eastern Mediterranean (e.g., via Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hamas in Gaza, Salafi Army of Conquest in Syria), continues occupation of EU member Cyprus, and violates EU member Greece’s territorial airspace andwaters, his personal ambition is posing a risk for the NATO alliance.
In July 2015, a formation of Turkish fighter jets also violated Greek airspace a total of 20 times before being chased off by Greek aircraft. By antagonizing Cyprus, Greece, Egypt and Iraqi Kurdistan,Turkey is ironically the great unifier driving these countries to side with Russia in the Mediterranean.
Now that Turkey sabotaged French President Hollande’s plan to garner Russia-US cooperation in fighting ISIS by downing the Russian plane, the Russian coalition may seek to forge alternative cooperation with France, Germany and EU rather than US and Turkey, possibly joined by China given recent ISIS execution of the Chinese hostage. {She seems to forget murder of senior execs in Mali}
And as Erdogan continues to goad NATO to stand in solidarity with Turkey and its territorial expansions in the Levant, it appears the world is now entering a dangerous new phase of an increasingly post-western and illiberal world order.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/nato-tur ... th-cyprus/

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 18:57

this is certainly interesting, .................very interesting.

AKilluminati ‏@An0nKn0wledge 3h3 hours ago
Ordinary Turks apologize to Russia for Su-24 shoot down in Syria:
http://www.sott.net/article/307239-Ordi ... n-in-Syria …

RETWEETS 5 Likes 4

Ordinary Turks apologize to Russia for Su-24 shoot down in Syria

Sputnik News
Wed, 25 Nov 2015 00:00 UTCMap

© AP2015/David Gannon
As expected, the F-16 attack on a Russian Su-24 bomber over Syria has become a hot topic for discussion on Turkish social media. Taking a peak at both the Turkish and English-language corners of the Twitterverse, Sputnik discovered that not only are many Turks upset over the incident, some are downright outraged over their government's actions.

With the Turkish Air Force attack on the Russian plane in Syria instantly provoking a swelling response of debate and condolences from both Russian and foreign social media users, Turkish social media users naturally joined in. But in a surprising twist, many offered apologies to their northern neighbor, emphasizing that it is the Recep Erdogan government, not the Turkish people, who should be blamed for the attack.

Some users appealed directly to their Russian friends, using the Russian-language hashtag #StabInTheBack.

Follow

Tolga Tugcu
‏@tolga_tugcu
#УдарВСпину As a Turk I apologize for Turkish gov. action today for shooting down the #Russia 's fighter jet, a lot of Turks on your side
RETWEETS 26 Likes 33

Follow

almora
‏@almorax
#УдарВСпину ISIL supporters are our common enemies. Especially Turkish gov't.
Sorry for your lost. Loves from Turkey.
RETWEETS 7 Likes 14

Others responded elsewhere, in other forms, one user even appealing to the Russian prime minister. Many emphasized that they were "ashamed" over their government's actions, placing the blame squarely on the Erdogan government.

Others still took a wider view of the situation, suggesting, as a few experts have also done, that Erdogan may not have acted alone:

On English-language Twitter, a debate broke out over the Turkish government's charge, publicized by WikiLeaks, that the Russian plane had flown into Turkish airspace, and their claim that the military had warned the plane ten times over five minutes to change their trajectory.

The same debate broke out on Turkish Twitter, with Sputnik picking up on one such exchange, involving Meydan Gazete journalist Turgay Ogur:

"Some details have been made available," Ogur writes. "The plane was approaching the Turkish border, and was warned ten times over the course of five minutes. Our airspace was violated for 17 seconds."

With Ogur admitting that "of course he would have been in Damascus" by then, Demir Ok noted that what she can't "understand how a plane which had violated our airspace for only 17 seconds could have been warned over the space of five minutes?"

Posting the famous images supposedly showing the plane's flight trajectory, a user named Ibrahim Kalin commented that "the data from radar observations of the movement of the downed plane clearly show that, despite warnings, it had violated our airspace."
@ikalin1 @avomerturanli ABD uçakları tankları alayı tr de bu ihlal sayılmıyormu? Yarın doğalgazı keserse görürsünüz ihlali. +

— hakaneren (@hakan_eren_28) 24 ноября 2015
Responding to Kalin, and the images, a user named hakaneren sarcastically asked: "And American planes, tanks, convoys aren't violating our border? Tomorrow the Russians will up and shut off our gas supplies; then you'll have your violation."

Others took another tack, focusing their criticism on what they felt was the "erratic" and "dangerous" foreign policy approach of the Erdogan government.

"What I got out of Erdogan's speech: the Russian plane was shot down not because it had violated our airspace, but because Russia has struck the Turkmen." (a group of Turkish-trained rebels fighting in Syria against Damascus)

"The foreign policy of the AKP in brief: 1. The downing of the plane shows that the country can be dragged into any war. 2. The Turkmen are a marvelous pretext for supporting the jihadists."

"I believe we are faced, in terms of both domestic and foreign policy, with the most dangerous authorities in the country's history, because it is impossible to predict what they might do next."

Ultimately, this outpouring of support from many Turks for Russia and the Russian pilots is an important reminder that whatever mistakes a government might commit, the offended side should never make the mistake of conflating a nation with its wayward leaders.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Nov 2015 19:05

imo
- they are bombing the oil transport & storage infra not the refineries. trucks and tanks are easy to replace, not smashed refineries or flaming wellheads. seems to be an agreement on this as we dont hear of oil well fires there.
- Rus has decided to target the erdogan clan politically and discredit them internally , perhaps with more damaging revelations of their business deals.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 19:13

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 27 Nov 2015 19:18

the world well remembers what Saddam did to Kuwait and nobody wants a repeat of that. it was extensively documented.

and nobody wants to pay for the repair of an ecological disaster.

so Russia, carpet bomb northwest Syria all it wants too, but their will be an end to this eventually.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 27 Nov 2015 19:22

The West Wants Turkey Out

27.11.2015 Author: Martin Berger

The West Wants Turkey Out

The downing of Russia’s Su-24 bomber by the Turkish Air Force is “one of the nightmare scenarios that military planners had envisaged as a result of Moscow’s decision to enter the conflict,” reports The Financial Times.

In turn, The Washington Post believes that “NATO faced being thrust into a new Middle Eastern crisis… The incident marked a serious escalation in the Syrian conflict that is likely to further strain relations between Russia and the NATO alliance.”

The Guardian argues that we’ve witnessed “a nerve-jangling event, that raised the spectre of a direct confrontation between two large powers: one a Nato member, the other nuclear-armed”.

While it’s clear that neither Russia nor NATO wants to go to war against each other, each side is trying to deal with the situation and identify the reasons that provoked the recent crisis and, what’s even more important, to establish who’s at fault.

In this context one cannot help but remember a short report that was published by the Daily Star, citing unnamed sources in the UK government. According to this report all NATO pilots were given clearance to attack “unfriendly” Russian planes if perceived to “threaten the lives” of NATO’s military personnel. For this reason all RAF aircraft were equipped with short-range “air-to-air” missiles, which are to be fired at Russian fighters.

However, to resolve the difficult crisis that followed the destruction of the Russian Su-24 quickly, the West is now searching for those “guilty” of this blatant attack, which is, without a doubt, the Turkish leader – Tayyip Erdogan. It seems that NATO states are not afraid to criticize Turkey for its actions against Russia. Vice-Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany and the chairman of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) Sigmar Gabriel expressed harsh criticism of Turkey after the downing of Russia’s Su-24 bombers by labeling it an “unpredictable player”, reports the German Die Welt.

The members of NATO fear that the “impulsive actions” of Turkey’s President will force them into a new major conflict, and NATO is not prepared to fight it yet. These “impulsive actions” may trigger the response that is required by Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. No wonder Hollande, while declaring war against ISIL, made no reference of Article 5, by quoting the EU Lisbon Treaty instead.

France is convinced that once the “Muslim Brotherhood” came to power in Turkey, headed by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey has become a major headache for Western politicians, says Le Figaro. According to its journalists, Turkey used to be an ally of the West, however, it is nothing of the kind anymore. Relations with Turkey took a U-turn once Erdogan started systematically “undermining” Turkey’s strategic relations with Israel which were stable since 1949. Anti-Turkish sentiments in the West were aggravated even further by the games Erdogan had been playing during the “Arab Spring”, when he first became a close friend of Bashar al-Assad, and then stabbed him in the back by allowing jihadists from around the world to swarm into Syria by crossing through Turkey’s territory. When the sworn enemies of Erdogan – local Kurds were dying in a heroic defense of the city of Kobani, Turkey did nothing to relieve their suffering, waiting for Western countries to save the population of the city instead.

In this context it’s curious what the former NATO commander of Europe, Ret. General Wesley Clark, has been saying about Turkey : “Let’s be very clear: ISIL is not just a terrorist organization, it is a Sunni terrorist organization. It means it blocks and targets Shia, and that means it’s serving the interests of Turkey and Saudi Arabia even as it poses a threat to them All along there’s always been the idea that Turkey was supporting ISIS in some way… Someone’s buying that oil that ISIL is selling, it’s going through somewhere. It looks to me like it’s probably going through Turkey, but the Turks have never acknowledged it.” Here’s the reason why Russia was stabbed in the back by a NATO member country.

Once Russia began military operations against ISIL in Syria, Ankara’s relations with Washington started deteriorating rapidly. The situation we have on our hands now is further complicated by the fact that it was “defenseless” Turkomans who were shooting Russian pilots as they descended with parachutes, along with bringing down a Russian helicopter that was sent to rescue the pilots. All the recent NATO meetings have been stained by concerns that the Turkish agenda in Syria has little to do with the position of the West. Now that Erdogan’s arrogance has become apparent to everyone, even though he allowed the US Air Force to use a base in Turkey’s territory, he has also been launching attacks against Syrian Kurds that remain the most faithful allies of Washington in the fight against ISIL.

It is, therefore, hardly surprising that a retired US Major General Paul Vallely accused the Turkish government of an attempt to create a new Ottoman Empire. According to him, due to all well-known facts of Ankara’s assistance to the Islamic State, Turkey should be expelled from NATO.

The Washington Times is also questioning Turkey as a member state of NATO, while underlying that the attack on the Russian Su-24 makes this debate particularly relevant and timely. The newspaper notes that Ankara has been providing ISIL units with close air support when the latter was fighting Kurds in Syria and Iraq. Its journalists are convinced that Turkey has been turned into a theocratic Islamist dictatorship, where the freedom of the press is gradually been destroyed.

The conservative American Thinker goes even further by claiming it’s about time to replace Turkey with Russia in NATO, since the West has more in common with Russia than with the Islamist Turkey. To support this position, the magazine notes that when Turkey joined NATO back in February 1952, the advocates of this step argued that they need an Islamic state to prevent Soviet expansion in the region from happening. But it’s clear that this was a deal with the devil. After all, it was the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 that broke the alliance apart, forcing Greece to withdraw its troop from under NATO command. In 2012, Syria shot down a Turkish fighter since it was deliberately violating its airspace. Later that same year, Turkey bombarded government facilities in Syria.

For decades, Turkey has used NATO membership, in order to achieve its own objectives, which, as a rule, do not coincide with the interests of the alliance. In the early 2000s, Turkey chose to demonstrate its support of Islamism, which has always been a more serious threat to the West than the Soviet Union. Therefore, it seems that the American Thinker has expressed the opinion of a larger part of the western public, by urging NATO to get in an alliance with Russia against Islamism, including the “Islamic state of Turkey.”

Martin Berger is a Czech-based freelance journalist and analyst, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook