|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Turkey shoots down Russian jet
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
It seems that the Turkish Air Force has shot down a Russian fighter plane that was engaged in actions against (Turkish-backed) Turkmen rebels in northern Syria. BBC story. Some reports suggest that both pilots ejected, but were subsequently killed by Turkmen rebels.
Russia is, understandably, quite upset.
Turkey is a member of NATO, which means both the UK and US are pledged to defend it from attack.
I seriously doubt that this will lead to war. But given the current international climate it's not exactly a good thing. No doubt questions will be asked about whether the fighter did actually pass into Turkish airspace, and if so for how long, but given the problems Putin currently faces at home there's always the possibility of him using this to distract from them.
Are you concerned at all, or do you think this will blow over with no real global consequences?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
I am concerned. One way or another it probably will be all over by Christmas on this occasion .
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
I am concerned, because I'm not sure how easily the rest of NATO can influence Turkey. Turkey's motives in Syria, Iraq and that whole region aren't those of other countries that don't border them.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
I am concerned. It's a mess, so many muddled wars in the region.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
From a timely article discussing various ways World War III could potentially start.
quote:
Syria
The Spark:
At the moment, ISIS has drawn the attention of most of the world’s most powerful countries, including France, the United States, and Russia. But the explosion of attention (not to mention air traffic) could complicate the next step in the war. On the one hand, an accidental confrontation between NATO and Russia aircraft could lead to bad tactical decisions, with one or more planes shot out of the air. On the other, a dramatic shift on the ground in Syria could force the hand of one of the supporters of the proxy combatants.
Escalation:
Even if the emerging anti-ISIS coalition prevails, conflict between major power could ensue. This could get ugly, as France, Russia, and the United States have very different views about how the future of Syria should look. If any of the three decide to intervene in favor of their preferred factions, the situation could very quickly come to resemble a game of chicken, with airstrikes, no fly zones, and secure enclaves providing the points of conflict. Serious fighting between external powers in Syria could quickly draw in Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, and potentially spread to other parts of the globe.
Note this article was posted three days before the incident in question.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Thing is, as far as can be made out, that's exactly what ISIS want ... to draw both the Western powers and Russia and its allies into some kind of Armageddon ...
Everyone should tread carefully, lest they give the fanatics what they want.
I'm not one of these eye-rolling conspiracy theorists - I've come across some Americans online who believe that Obama wants WW III - and I think NATO needs this like a hole in the head ... as one BBC reporter observed earlier today.
It suits Turkey to draw NATO in and I suspect they're using the cover of NATO to goad the Russians ...
The trouble is, there's too much going on and decisions are being taken on the fly. If there were to be a coalition against ISIS, for instance, then there should be a properly agreed and worked out plan. At the moment, everyone seems to be bombing everyone else ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Thing is, as far as can be made out, that's exactly what ISIS want ... to draw both the Western powers and Russia and its allies into some kind of Armageddon ...
Everyone should tread carefully, lest they give the fanatics what they want.
ISIS wants that because they believe they'll win in the ensuing war. Any rational observer knows that if it actually happened they'd be wiped out in days. The real worry is that this situation leads to the major powers fighting each other.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
On the BBC, the Turks were claiming that the crew are OK and they are getting to them.
They also showed a map. For some reason or other, the idiot dividers-up of the Ottoman Empire allowed a little panhandle of Turkey to project into Syria - I'm not sure how large it is as there was no scale. The Turkish map of the plane's route shows it cutting briefly across the neck of this area. I couldn't imagine how they had time for ten warnings. And it seemed totally ridiculous to complain about what was an extremely easy mistake to make, and which was no threat to Turkey's sovereignty at all.
Trying to find a map to refer to here didn't show anything which looked like the map on the BBC - I suspect a disputed area.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Penny S: I couldn't imagine how they had time for ten warnings.
I'm not choosing sides here, but I understand that they started issuing warnings a couple of miles before the Russian plane (allegedly) entered their territory.
[ 24. November 2015, 18:32: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It suits Turkey to draw NATO in and I suspect they're using the cover of NATO to goad the Russians ...
I'd go along with that, and for this reason my guess is the NATO pledge won,t hold even if the Russians do take the regrettable step of retaliating militarily. Something we all fervently hope they do not.
[ 24. November 2015, 18:37: Message edited by: rolyn ]
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
Rationally I believe Penny S is right.
However there is a sociopathic part of me that thinks the Russian air force has been flying provocatively ever since the Crimean crisis and has just got what was coming to it ...
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Penny S: Trying to find a map to refer to here didn't show anything which looked like the map on the BBC - I suspect a disputed area.
Not really. This is the area in question. Based on the speed of a Russian jet, it would have taken 10–20 seconds to cross this small stretch of Turkish land.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Are you concerned at all, or do you think this will blow over with no real global consequences?
I'm not very concerned. It seems very unlikely that any NATO countries would seriously consider sending folks to fight for Turkey. Russia can demonstrate calm and restraint for the moment and arrange some plausible deniability for a few killings of Turkish swells later on.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
Thanks - I wasn't looking at that scale, but that did seem the most likely area to have Syria both sides.
What the perdition were they doing down there? Going back to the ship?
They didn't need shooting down, unless Turkey had already gone through the diplomatic channels of demanding that they do not cut off the corner some time ago.
That bit at the end of the Zygon episode - about having to end up talking so it is better to do the talking at the start seems appropriate. But too late.
Three nutters in power involved.
Where I used to live there was an old tramway tunnel across the road, that still had some fittings in it from when it was used as an air raid shelter. Only they filled in the cutting it was in, and it would take a bit of digging to open it up again. Nowhere useful like that round here.
[ 24. November 2015, 20:30: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Looking at that map, it appears that the boundary does make sense on the ground. There appears to be a valley with a road going up it that is in Turkey. So an air crew should know that they should not be crossing it. However, these are the sort of mistakes it would be easy to make.
More fundamentally, we shouldn't be picking a quarrel with either the Turks or the Russians on this at the moment. As far as Syria is concerned, we should be on the same side as the Russians, and that has been the case since the civil war started. Apart from the danger that ISIS or whatever it calls itself this week is to the rest of the civilised world, there is nothing about any faction in Syria that would make one prefer to see them win, apart from the fact that the original government of Syria is - or was - that.
Unfortunately, since the war started, over time, Asad, who wasn't that nice to start with, has become captive to some very nasty thugs on his own side. But there's no benign liberally minded true democrats in any of the other factions. If there ever was - and I suspect there wasn't - they're long since dead. That's why the population of the country is streaming westwards out of the country.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
I'm not very concerned. It seems very unlikely that any NATO countries would seriously consider sending folks to fight for Turkey. Russia can demonstrate calm and restraint for the moment and arrange some plausible deniability for a few killings of Turkish swells later on.
I expect Russia will lend support to opposition groups, and that Turkey may find gas rather expensive this winter.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
They didn't need shooting down, unless Turkey had already gone through the diplomatic channels of demanding that they do not cut off the corner some time ago.
I believe they have recently done exactly that. Didn't it make the news a few weeks back?
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nenya
Shipmate
# 16427
|
Posted
[Frivolous tangent] I am thinking too much about Christmas and the title of this thread conjured up a very funny image. [/frivolous tangent]
--------------------
They told me I was delusional. I nearly fell off my unicorn.
Posts: 1289 | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I'd love to see that card!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
From the Russian perspective (I read Pravda news feeds) the west has been gunning for Russian for some time. Pulling in all the countries that used to be in Russian sphere of interest. They don't like it very much, which is why they aligned with Assad in Syria. (It's also why they digested Crimea, The Donbass and are probably looking at some other parts of Ukraine which is mostly Russian speaking in the east). The west thought getting Assad out would be easy, though we might have learned something if we weren't so stupid with the two countries to the east of Syria.
Putin has show us again that people are willing to sacrifice some democracy for improved living standards and some national pride.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The West was most unmagnanimous to Russia after the fall of communism. No wonder they'll do anything to get back self-respect.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
As far as Syria is concerned, we should be on the same side as the Russians, and that has been the case since the civil war started.
We should be, but that isn't the impression gained from actions. The only reason for a Russian jet to be in that part of Turkey is to bomb Turkmen targets, because Russia is supporting Assad. On the other hand, Turkey is supporting the Turkmen rebels (against both Assad and Daesh), the US is supporting the Kurdish rebels (against both Assad and Daesh) with airstrikes against Daesh, and France just seems to be bombing anything they can see that might be Daesh.
So, apart from no one supporting Daesh there is no unity in response. US supports the Kurds, Turkey is opposed to the Kurdish rebels with a long history of problems relating to Kurds in their own territory (another result of breaking up the Ottoman Empire along lines that didn't respect ethnicity). Russia supports Assad, who no one else likes. Turkey supports the Turkmen and other coalition rebels, which the US also supports but the Russians are bombing because they oppose Assad.
It's a mess, and something like the latest incident has been on the cards for a long time. Turkey has already shot down Syrian aircraft operating too close to it's border. And, the Turkish government has been telling the Russians for weeks that their aircraft are operating too close to and violating Turkish airspace.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
If the allegations are true that Turkey is buying black-market oil from ISIS, then recent Russian action in western Syria will have been annoying them no end. Turkish trigger fingers will have been getting twitchy.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
On the BBC, the Turks were claiming that the crew are OK and they are getting to them.
They also showed a map. For some reason or other, the idiot dividers-up of the Ottoman Empire allowed a little panhandle of Turkey to project into Syria - I'm not sure how large it is as there was no scale. The Turkish map of the plane's route shows it cutting briefly across the neck of this area. I couldn't imagine how they had time for ten warnings. And it seemed totally ridiculous to complain about what was an extremely easy mistake to make, and which was no threat to Turkey's sovereignty at all.
Trying to find a map to refer to here didn't show anything which looked like the map on the BBC - I suspect a disputed area.
I can't agree with your comment about "idiot dividers-up", and think that your suspicion of a disputed area is equally wrong. If you look at any map, you will see that the area is a valley opening nor-west into Turkey, and with ridges dividing it from what is now Syria. I don't know the ethnicity of those living there, but from a topological viewpoint the boundary makes great sense.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
It certainly seems to make more sense than the practice of drawing straight lines on maps, which respect neither ethnic boundaries nor natural features.
Regardless of the location of the border, no nation will be happy about military aircraft approaching their border. Even more so when the only reason for those aircraft to be there is to monitor or bomb allies.
There are al-Nusra (Al-qaeda affiliated) forces further north by the Turkish border which could be considered a target for a war on terrorist organisation. But in the region of the crash the territory is securely held by national coalition forces, who may not be blameless in their conduct of the civil war but are not implicated in terrorist action and together with the Kurds are about as close to "good guys" as there are in Syria.
It shouldn't take a military genius to know that if you're going to attack rebel forces supported by Turkey then flying close enough to Turkey that there's a risk of being thought to be in, or heading towards, Turkish airspace is an extremely aggressive act. Even more so when Putin has gained a reputation for aggressive actions - whether through rigged referendum in Crimea or sending troops into Eastern Ukraine, or even submarines in UK waters. He's pushing because he knows NATO does not want to engage his forces. But, it's a very dangerous game of brinkmanship. In terms of potential for things turning really bad, he makes Daesh look like amateurs.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
--IIRC, NATO didn't really want Turkey in the first place.
--Having grown up with fundamentalist Protestant teachings on the End Times, Armageddon, etc., I tend to keep a sensor out for news that seems to point in that direction. (Despite not being sure that the premise is remotely true, and not wanting it to be.)
Stephen Colbert (so it must be true ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ) recently said that Daesh's/ISIS' HQ is about 90 miles from where Armageddon is to take place. And Daesh/ISIS wants to bring about *their* version of the apocalypse...
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Western actions in the region look very aggressive in Russian eyes Alan. The Russians put today together the fall of the USSR, insofar as the USA created the precursor to Al Qaeda to defeat them, with continued aggression in search of oil in the Persian Gulf since. About 10 years ago, CBC Radio 1 had it that we are simply watching The Great Game, version 2. This time the USA has replaced Great Britain. I see this wikipedia link calls it "The New Great Game". Nice. Same shit, not a different pile. Great that we get to be nice Christian countries and take in some refugees.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I do think that history repeats itself. In the recent Remembrance thread I made the point that in the period prior to 1914 European powers were engaged in a "Cold War" conducted by proxy conflicts in colonies but based on the assumption that the arms race had created sufficiently powerful armies on all sides that an all-out war would be a disaster that would destroy all sides. The events of 1914-18 showed this to be true when the cold war brinkmanship pushed things too far.
The effects of that war were to make Britain and France very reluctant to enter another European War (Stalin was a psycopath, and probably a lot more keen on a war), which allowed Hitler to play the brinksman as he took tentative steps towards his plan and watched Britain and France back down - rebuilding German military strength, entering the Rhineland, annexing part of Czechoslovakia ... until finally his gamble failed and invading Poland was a step too far.
Of course, post 1945 we entered another Cold War. The arms race was different from the run-up to 1914, nuclear weapons and deployment systems replacing battleships and infantry divisions, but many of the other features of that Cold War were similar. We were lucky to avoid all-out war over Cuba, that came very close to being the point where brinkmanship went too far. But, it was a Cold War that didn't have a resolution and we are still living with the consequences of the proxy wars that were fought - in Afghanistan the West created the Taliban, both sides supported dictators around the world and left political vacuums as they fell (Iraq, Libya and Syria are but the latest to fall).
And, yes, the Western powers are still afraid of Russia, which still has a substantial nuclear arsenal. Was NATO expansion eastwards to counter that perceived threat wise? Possibly not, but the Baltic States and other former Warsaw Pact nations were sufficiently concerned about renewed Russian imperialism to seek NATO membership, or at least NATO support.
We aren't blameless in playing our part in this renewed "Great Game". But, does that excuse Russian annexation of the Crimea and military operations in the Ukraine? But, just as in 1936-39, the Western powers do not want outright war and so it's possible for Putin to push a little bit and get away with it.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
And we here remember the shooting down of a Malaysian Airlines plane over Crimea. It does not matter if it were Russians directly, or the local insurgents as the latter are Putin's clients. Certainly the weaponry used was well advanced from that in the normal armoury of the insurgents and it, along with those trained to use it, would have been supplied by the Russians.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
It is very hard to know who to believe in the current circumstances, and I'm sure the media are telling their audience a version that is acceptable to them.
I suspect the reality is that we're all being lied to and that there are geopolitical games being played.
The undisputed truth, as far as I can tell, is that Russia has been bombing rebels in Syria - including but not exclusively IS - in support of Assad. One of their planes flying close to the Turkish border was shot down, with the pilots killed or missing.
But everything else seems to be disputed. Russia has apparently being regularly playing games on NATOs borders, with regular sorties by warplanes, possibly even submarines. But there is no independent corroboration of this, we only know what the NATO armies tell us.
Turkey, according to some, is tacitly supporting IS to some extent, although why they would do this is a mystery to most in Western Europe. At the same time, EU nations see Turkey as the answer to the refugee crisis.
The USA and allies are regularly bombing IS in Iraq and Syria, with some success according to them. But then we don't really know what is happening, because IS do not like western journalists and the coalition are mostly using drones flown from a desk a zillion miles away.
So it is possible with the limited verifiable information to construct narratives both ways around.
Maybe Turkey warned the Russians before they went into Turkish airspace, maybe they didn't. Maybe the Russias were actually in Turkish airspace (by accident perhaps?), maybe they weren't.
One possible point in Russia's favour appears to be that the plane was in Turkish airspace for a matter of seconds, and yet this was still long enough to be hit by a missle and to be caught doing it on camera. What are the chances of that?
It is a mess. I hope sensible heads will prevail.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Turkey has already shot down Syrian aircraft operating too close to it's border. And, the Turkish government has been telling the Russians for weeks that their aircraft are operating too close to and violating Turkish airspace.
Well, those two statements are telling in themselves, and Turkey has past form with violating the airspace of other states (Greece for instance). Regardless of airspace violation - it's shooting something that turns a cold war into a hot war.
Turkey - and the AKP particularly - seems to have a lot of links to ISIS and ISIS related groups:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/research-paper-isis-turke_b_6128950.html
This is before we start to consider the Islamicisation of Turkey that has been presided over by Erdogan.
Putin - for all his faults - seems to largely intervene in areas that are - in relative terms - in Russia's backyard. Unless we have the will to actually deal with him - and I suggest we don't, leaving him alone seems to be the best option, whilst pursuing a diplomatic option.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
mr cheesy: One possible point in Russia's favour appears to be that the plane was in Turkish airspace for a matter of seconds, and yet this was still long enough to be hit by a missle and to be caught doing it on camera. What are the chances of that?
If the Turkish version is correct, the shot was fired when the jet was in this small strip of Turkish space, but it hit when it was already in Syrian space again. This makes sense, giving the speeds involved.
Of course, the Turkish were waiting for this to happen a bit. If you look at the map, if a Russian plane is going to cross Turkish space anywhere, it is going to be there. So I can imagine that they put cameras there beforehand.
quote:
Gee D: And we here remember the shooting down of a Malaysian Airlines plane over Crimea.
Small point of correction: it was over the East of Ukraine.
[ 25. November 2015, 09:10: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Thank you.
As to your first point, I'd be very surprised if the Turks had not given warnings for some time to the Russians - a courtesy that has somehow escaped the Kremlin.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
Yes, the Turks have been warning them over and over. However cavalier the behaviour of Putin's boys, did the Turks really think that the Russian planes were an imminent threat to Turkey itself? A Turkish friend of mine suspects that Erdogan (who is himself an islamist) is playing another game here—he's already been caught red-handed shipping weapons to ISIS.
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Thanks Chris. Sunni & Shia. Bang bang.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Alan Cresswell wrote:
quote:
The only reason for a Russian jet to be in that part of Turkey is to bomb Turkmen targets, because Russia is supporting Assad. On the other hand, Turkey is supporting the Turkmen rebels (against both Assad and Daesh), the US is supporting the Kurdish rebels (against both Assad and Daesh) with airstrikes against Daesh, and France just seems to be bombing anything they can see that might be Daesh.
The Sunni tribes have been to an extent supporting IS. Previously, they had fought against Al Qaeda in Iraq, but got disillusioned with the Iraqui govt, and in Syria, loathed the advance of Hezbollah, and the power of Iran.
I am curious as to any plan Western forces have now, since Russia is clearly supporting Assad, which will also antagonize the Sunni tribes.
This is not insuperable, (see the Awakening, and the fight against Al Qaeda), but such tribes will need a lot of convincing now, that they will have their own autonomous region, or whatever, and will not be under attack from Iranian backed forces.
Russia is clearly lining up with the Iran-Hezbollah axis, which is ominous, (the so-called 'military triangle'). The Sunni axis, which includes Turkey, is not happy at all, and they will keep turning to IS, unless they are offered something different. Maybe Cameron has a plan? Bombing Sunni villages and tribes is something of a boomerang.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Net Spinster
Shipmate
# 16058
|
Posted
The bit of land is part of the province of Hatay which was after the break up of the Ottoman empire part of the French Mandate; its ethnicity was very mixed (less so now) and it became part of Turkey in 1939 after a referendum (a somewhat disputed referendum). It is disputed though quieting down to the point of a few joint projects before the whole war started. It was one of the great cross roads of trade (Antakya, its capital, is Antioch of old; the valley of the Orontes river comes from the south and passes through mountains that form the south border of Hatay, other routes came from other directions).
--------------------
spinner of webs
Posts: 1093 | From: San Francisco Bay area | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I am curious as to any plan Western forces have now, since Russia is clearly supporting Assad, which will also antagonize the Sunni tribes.
Well, this has clearly been the case since Russia went in - after all, they did so at the invitation of the Syrian government (thus making their intervention legal in international terms). There was some room for the west to manoeuvre given that Russia had stated that its preferred solution would be multiparty talks - to which end various members of the Syrian opposition were invited to Moscow - at the time the US spokesman said that such a move was 'pre-mature'. Of course, it could well have been an insincere move, however, playing lip service to it could have got some momentum going on a future deal.
In retrospect, it would have been better to get on that band-wagon, I doubt if the same opportunity is going to be available right now.
quote:
The Sunni axis, which includes Turkey, is not happy at all, and they will keep turning to IS, unless they are offered something different.
The wider Sunni axis, has been long stirring trouble in the area because from their point of view, any Shia influence (and in the case of Turkey Kurdish influence) is too much.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Net Spinster: The bit of land is part of the province of Hatay which was after the break up of the Ottoman empire part of the French Mandate; its ethnicity was very mixed (less so now) and it became part of Turkey in 1939 after a referendum (a somewhat disputed referendum). It is disputed though quieting down to the point of a few joint projects before the whole war started.
Thank you, my assertion that the area doesn't seem to be disputed was a bit premature.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Apparently the Russians are saying they have rescued one of their airmen via a special-forces operation of the Syrian army and Hezbollah.
That's... um.. scary.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Apparently the Russians are saying they have rescued one of their airmen via a special-forces operation of the Syrian army and Hezbollah.
That's... um.. scary.
Well, if what I've read on this thread is to be believed, we've already got Turkey, a NATO country, in an under-the-table alliance with IS. So, a Hezbollah allied Russia wouldn't exactly seem to be a new degree of horror.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
The West does appear to be interested in getting Hezbollah to do the boots on the the ground bit against IS. Maybe we'll supply the boots , the availability of weapons never seems to be a problem for Middle Easterners.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I can see the headlines now, the Russia-Iran-Hezbollah alliance is joined by David (just call me Churchill) Cameron. Tories to cement alliance with toasts in vodka, Iranian caviar and down with Israel banners.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Watched a PSB America prog last night called Obama at War, it was pretty bloody depressing to be honest. Didn't realise Syria was oil-less, that might explain a lot.
I'm not blaming the US for not going in in a big way earlier. Iraq didn't exactly turn out as a picnic. I do wonder though who, or what triggered the Arab Spring. Tunisia yeah, fair enough, Egypt? Ok just. Lybia couldn't have got rid of Gadaffe without Western help, and as for Syria? They never had a cat's chance in hell of ousting Assad on their own, no matter what the wildest optimist thought.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
No question it was the CIA. It was time to change the guard in Egypt. That's been managed. Nobody else matters in North Africa. Apart from Morocco. No problem there. Libya? Back the most corrupt warlord. One would hope that there was no 'idealism' involved on behalf of the US, but I'm afraid that there was. That's ALWAYS worrying.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The Russians and Americans just need to figure out how to divide up the countries in the region. Then kill off those they can't manage easily. Stalin is the most recent Russian example. Though the USA hasn't done this sort of thing very seriously since the 19th century. Something more dramatic required for a trigger.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Net Spinster:
The bit of land is part of the province of Hatay which was after the break up of the Ottoman empire part of the French Mandate; its ethnicity was very mixed (less so now) and it became part of Turkey in 1939 after a referendum (a somewhat disputed referendum). It is disputed though quieting down to the point of a few joint projects before the whole war started. It was one of the great cross roads of trade (Antakya, its capital, is Antioch of old; the valley of the Orontes river comes from the south and passes through mountains that form the south border of Hatay, other routes came from other directions).
[Film trivia point] The short-lived Republic of Hatay features in 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade'[/Film trivia point]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Matt Black: [Film trivia point] The short-lived Republic of Hatay features in 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade'[/Film trivia point]
That's cool.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
No question it was the CIA.
I'm inclined to agree Martin. Guess most who did so in the past no longer have the energy to thrash heads against table-tops in anti-US rant. Good friends to us when Europe was in a mess, now we must do likewise over the Middle East.
Can't help but feel sorry for Syria though, a hopeless uprising followed by what seems like the whole world queuing up to bomb the place. I mean are those big fish we so keen to zap really going to be sitting there waiting for a bomb to drop on their head?
Here's to something better rising from the ashes ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
