Russian boots on the ground in Syria. Another Afghanistan?

Lockstep

leavingirl wrote: »

See previous post and again see 6:39 on this video where Obama admits training them. What say you now?
http://youtu.be/vkxFT_hJCdQ

A slip of the tongue by Obama doesn't prove anything. See here
Personally, I'd need to see much more evidence than a gaffe by Obama which has been seized upon by conspiracy theorists across the world. Noone else has really bothered with it (apart from some Russian news agencies)

As for John McCain, this has already been dealt with in this thread. See here

glued

Well this is exactly what nobody wanted. Russia have been warned repeatedly about violating Turkey's airspace but there will definitely be a massive shift as a result of this. The BBC claim that there has been overwhelming criticism of Turkey and the West on Russian State TV in the immediate aftermath of this incident.

The Turks are saying they have proof that Russia have violated their airspace and the Russians claim they have proof they never entered Turkish airspace.

Gatling

glued wrote: »

Russians claim they have proof they never entered Turkish airspace.

The same Russians who claimed they had proof of Ukraine shooting down flight MH17 by a Ukrainian airforce fighter jet

BoJack Horseman

glued wrote: »

there has been overwhelming criticism of Turkey and the West on Russian State TV in the immediate aftermath of this incident.

So, no change then.

The Turks are saying they have proof that Russia have violated their airspace and the Russians claim they have proof they never entered Turkish airspace.

As gatling said.... I hope its better than their MH17 rebuttal!

drunkmonkey

Who's side are the Turks on?

Grand they violated their airspace but who are they supporting by shooting down a Russian Jet? Should they not be supporting them?

BoJack Horseman

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Who's side are the Turks on?

their own side, just like Russia.

Turkey has attacked Kurdish elements & has been less than willing to tackle the smuggling of men & marteriel across the border into ISIS controlled territory.

They are playing multiple sides.

Should they not be supporting them?

Not while they are bombing ethnic turkmen people living in Syria....

Its messy

glued

Gatling wrote: »

The same Russians who claimed they had proof of Ukraine shooting down flight MH17 by a Ukrainian airforce fighter jet

As opposed to the Turks who supply terrorists with weapons in exchange for oil and try and play every side in the Syrian war.

Anyone supporting the Turks needs to seriously take a look at themselves.

Dannyboy83

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Who's side are the Turks on?

Grand they violated their airspace but who are they supporting by shooting down a Russian Jet? Should they not be supporting them?

And who were Russia attacking?
The area where the plane was shot down is FAR from ISIS territory...



GREEN == Moderate opposition, Turkic people
GREY == ISIS
LIGHT RED = Assad
YELLOW = Kurd

Skylinehead

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And who were Russia attacking?
The area where the plane was shot down is FAR from ISIS territory...

You do realise that's barely 20 miles from the main Russian airbase? Hardly surprising that Russian jets would be in the vicinity.

BoJack Horseman

Skylinehead wrote: »

You do realise that's barely 20 miles from the main Russian airbase? Hardly surprising that Russian jets would be in the vicinity.

Indeed, but they should drop the pretense that they are engaging ISIS.
At this point, strikes on ISIS seem like a passing fancy for them.

Skylinehead

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Indeed, but they should drop the pretense that they are engaging ISIS.
At this point, strikes on ISIS seem like a passing fancy for them.

They attack any enemies of Assad, yes. I think they've upped their strikes on ISIS since the Sinai bombing though. Either way, whoever they're attacking has no relevance to that area, seeing as it's their airbase.

Iwasfrozen

The British should take notes and react similarly next time Russia violates their air space.

BoJack Horseman

Skylinehead wrote: »

Either way, whoever they're attacking has no relevance to that area, seeing as it's their airbase.

It is if they say (for the peanut gallery) that its ISIS, when that is not true.

Sure they expend some effort against them, but its not the main task, despite their rhetoric.

glued

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And who were Russia attacking?
The area where the plane was shot down is FAR from ISIS territory...



GREEN == Moderate opposition, Turkic people
GREY == ISIS
LIGHT RED = Assad
YELLOW = Kurd

You do realise that map is a another useless illustration of nothing. The moderate opposition is laughable. Just because ISIS don't control territory there doesn't mean they don't have a presence there.

Elmer Blooker

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

And who were Russia attacking?
The area where the plane was shot down is FAR from ISIS territory...

GREEN == Moderate opposition, Turkic people
GREY == ISIS
LIGHT RED = Assad
YELLOW = Kurd

Great! The "moderate" Turkic people. Are they now the flavour of the week?
Move over Tatars, your time is up. Oh yes .. the Yazidis, remember them?
As for the Kurds? Who? Since NATO started bombing them they don't get a look in! Which minority group will be in vogue next week?

Putin claimed that there are Russian jihadists (moderates fighting to turn Syria into a democratic paradise) in the area.

Dannyboy83

glued wrote: »

You do realise that map is a another useless illustration of nothing. The moderate opposition is laughable. Just because ISIS don't control territory there doesn't mean they don't have a presence there.

That yields a bigger question; why is Russia attacking 'laughable nothing'?

Dannyboy83

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Which minority group will be in vogue next week?

I guess that all depends on who Russia feels like attacking next week???

The Turkish foreign ministry summoned the Russian ambassador on Friday demanding that Russia cease operations in Syria targeting Turkmen villages.

He said the Russian actions were leading to the bombing of civilians.

Ambassador Andrey Karlov was warned during the meeting that the Russian operations could lead to serious consequences.

Gatling

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I guess that all depends on who Russia feels like attacking next week???

I bet it wont be groups close to the Turkish border

glued

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

That yields a bigger question; why is Russia attacking 'laughable nothing'?

Ah right, you don't get it.

Dannyboy83

Skylinehead wrote: »

You do realise that's barely 20 miles from the main Russian airbase? Hardly surprising that Russian jets would be in the vicinity.

Actually, this is quite surprising, as Russian pilots have a reputation for being well trained!

On November 24 2015 at around 9.20am, a plane whose nationality is not known violated the Turkish airspace despite several warnings (10 times within five minutes) in the area of Yayladagi, Hatary," the military said before the plane's nationality was confirmed.
It was shot down in an area which had been 'bombarded' earlier, known by Turks as "Turkmen Mountain".

Dannyboy83

glued wrote: »

Ah right, you don't get it.

I think we all get it.

Putin has been bluffing for way too long...Erdogan just called his bluff.

The Montreux treaty allows Turkey to block the Bosphorus, and Russia apparently delivers jet fuel for its planes by tanker ships from Novorossiysk through the Bosphorus.

The Russian Military seriously screwed up and does not have good options for escalation.

karma_

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The British should take notes and react similarly next time Russia violates their air space.

Listen to you, Turkey has messed up here, it's fairly obvious that shooting down a non-hostile states aircraft is tantamount to a declaration of war. Turkey are in NATO and you yourself have argued for them to be allowed into the EU. What exactly are Turley playing at? They are reckless, they support ISIS, materially and financially... what is going on in that part of the world?

donaghs

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

That yields a bigger question; why is Russia attacking 'laughable nothing'?

The poster didn't quite say that, but maybe the question is why is it a 'laughable nothing'?

Excluding the aforementioned Kurds, its hard to find an effective "moderate" opposition to Assad. Plenty of Sunni religious inspired types though still in the fight: Al-Nusra Front, Army_of_Conquest etc. Not forgetting others like the "Army of Mujahedeen" and Islam Front who are actually allied to the so-called moderate FSA. And Russia appears to have been primarily targeting them. Obviously, I think, because they are a greater immediate threat to Assad and the government heartland.

karma_

donaghs wrote: »

Perhaps because, excluding the aforementioned Kurds, its hard to find an effective "moderate" opposition to Assad. Plenty of Sunni religious inspired types though still in the fight: Al-Nusra Front, Army_of_Conquest etc. Not forgetting others like the "Army of Mujahedeen" and Islam Front who are actually allied to the so-called moderate FSA.

From what I can see of the situation, it appears that all of christian militias and cross sect sunni/shia militias are all fighting on the government side.

glued

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I think we all get it.

Putin has been bluffing for way too long...Erdogan just called his bluff.

The Montreux treaty allows Turkey to block the Bosphorus, and Russia apparently delivers jet fuel for its planes by tanker ships from Novorossiysk through the Bosphorus.

The Russian Military seriously screwed up and does not have good options for escalation.

No, really, you don't get it as evidenced by your cheerleading for the Turks. The map you provided is nothing but absolute rubbish.

Russia could easily escalate against Turkey. You're losing the run of yourself here. The anti-Russian rhetoric in here is getting worse by the day.

leavingirl

Lockstep wrote: »

A slip of the tongue by Obama doesn't prove anything. See here
Personally, I'd need to see much more evidence than a gaffe by Obama which has been seized upon by conspiracy theorists across the world. Noone else has really bothered with it (apart from some Russian news agencies)

As for John McCain, this has already been dealt with in this thread. See here

I don't know what you are linking to there. Did you look at the video?

I will show it again

There is no conspiracy. There is no theory. There is a video of the US Commander in Chief saying they are speeding up the training of ISIL.

Truth hidden in plain sight.

IrishTrajan

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Great! The "moderate" Turkic people. Are they now the flavour of the week?
Move over Tatars, your time is up. Oh yes .. the Yazidis, remember them?
As for the Kurds? Who? Since NATO started bombing them they don't get a look in! Which minority group will be in vogue next week?

Putin claimed that there are Russian jihadists (moderates fighting to turn Syria into a democratic paradise) in the area.

Proof?

IrishTrajan

glued wrote: »

Russia could easily escalate against Turkey.

But Russia won't because they need Turkey. Russia needs to create the Turkish Stream to counter the EU. Russia plans on building the nuclear power plant in Turkey (which I assume France would only be too happy to be contracted to do if the Turks decide they won't want Russia to do it).

Russia escalating against Turkey carries too high a risk. If Russia attacks Turkey directly, NATO may get involved and target Russian forces within Syria (allowing the Saudis to push Assad out of power).

Russia's gamble might be trying to win over the PKK by shipping weapons en masse. It would allow them to effectively fight a proxy war with Turkey and secure an ally within Syria (should Assad's regime fall), but this carries a lot of risks (for instance, if they supply AA weapons, it could be used against their own aircraft - either by the Kurdish should relations sour, or if rebel groups seize them in some offensives - or Turkey may give equivalent firearms to rebel groups).

glued

IrishTrajan wrote: »

But Russia won't because they need Turkey. Russia needs to create the Turkish Stream to counter the EU. Russia plans on building the nuclear power plant in Turkey (which I assume France would only be too happy to be contracted to do if the Turks decide they won't want Russia to do it).

Russia escalating against Turkey carries too high a risk. If Russia attacks Turkey directly, NATO may get involved and target Russian forces within Syria (allowing the Saudis to push Assad out of power).

Russia's gamble might be trying to win over the PKK by shipping weapons en masse. It would allow them to effectively fight a proxy war with Turkey and secure an ally within Syria (should Assad's regime fall), but this carries a lot of risks (for instance, if they supply AA weapons, it could be used against their own aircraft - either by the Kurdish should relations sour, or if rebel groups seize them in some offensives - or Turkey may give equivalent firearms to rebel groups).

That's an incorrect assessment. Private Russian investors have financed the Nuclear plant project. Turkey needs Russia to meet its energy needs. France can't just take over the site as Russia owns about 97% of the project. Putin has a lot of leverage financially over Turkey.

Turkey needs Russia a lot more than Russia needs Turkey. I agree with the rest of your post though.

IrishTrajan

glued wrote: »

That's an incorrect assessment. Private Russian investors have financed the Nuclear plant project. Turkey needs Russia to meet its energy needs. France can't just take over the site as Russia owns about 97% of the project. Putin has a lot of leverage financially over Turkey.

Turkey needs Russia a lot more than Russia needs Turkey. I agree with the rest of your post though.

https://www.stratfor.com/situation-report/turkey-erdogan-threatens-end-nuclear-natural-gas-cooperation-russia

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Oct. 8 that Turkey’s imports of Russian natural gas and Russia's construction of Turkey’s first nuclear power plant are at risk due to Russia’s bombing of Syria and recent violations of Turkish airspace, AFP reported. Turkey is one of the top importers of Russian natural gas and has been working with Moscow on developing the TurkStream natural gas pipeline — a project important to Moscow’s goals of relying less on Ukraine for the transport of natural gas. Russia is also building the $20 billion Akkuyu nuclear power plant. But Erdogan said Turkey is capable for going elsewhere for natural gas, and others can build the nuclear plant, into which Russia has already invested some $3 billion. Russia is botching Turkey's plans in Syria.

Of course in the immediate term, Turkey needs regular inflows of Russian gas, and in the long-term the Russian economy might boon from oil price rises, but in the medium term, Turkey really holds most of the power. Russia is cash-strapped, they can't really afford to lose the Turkish market.

Iran has, allegedly, forty million barrels of oil sitting in the Gulf. Is there a possibility Turkey could use this as an interim supply? We know from IS' oil sales that Turkey is willing to break the law if the pay off is worthwhile.

Lockstep

leavingirl wrote: »

I don't know what you are linking to there. Did you look at the video?

I will show it again

There is no conspiracy. There is no theory. There is a video of the US Commander in Chief saying they are speeding up the training of ISIL.

Truth hidden in plain sight.

Yes, I watched it and as the Snopes article shows, Obama made a gaffe. That's all there is to it if you read his speech in in full it's a speech on destroying ISIS. Why would he admit to training ISIS in such a speech?
Trying to argue this proves US support for ISIS is no more than wishful thinking.

glued

IrishTrajan wrote: »

https://www.stratfor.com/situation-report/turkey-erdogan-threatens-end-nuclear-natural-gas-cooperation-russia



Of course in the immediate term, Turkey needs regular inflows of Russian gas, and in the long-term the Russian economy might boon from oil price rises, but in the medium term, Turkey really holds most of the power. Russia is cash-strapped, they can't really afford to lose the Turkish market.

Iran has, allegedly, forty million barrels of oil sitting in the Gulf. Is there a possibility Turkey could use this as an interim supply? We know from IS' oil sales that Turkey is willing to break the law if the pay off is worthwhile.

Turkey's economy is in no better state than the Russian economy, even with the sanctions Russia faces. Turkey has a major energy problem and can't raise the funds to meet its needs, they have resorted to short term solutions such as buying oil off ISIS. Turkey couldn't be in any worse of a position. With regards the power plant; The Russians were the only ones willing to finance and build the project via private Russian investors.

Elmer Blooker

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Proof?

Do you honestly think that a NATO member will carry out an operation independently without getting the nod of approval from head office?

Gatling

glued wrote: »

The Russians were the only ones willing to finance and build the project via private Russian investors.

So if Turkey decided tomorrow all deals are off with Russia and go else ,

What could Russia do exactly

IrishTrajan

glued wrote: »

Turkey's economy is in no better state than the Russian economy, even with the sanctions Russia faces. Turkey has a major energy problem and can't raise the funds to meet its needs, they have resorted to short term solutions such as buying oil off ISIS. Turkey couldn't be in any worse of a position.

Does Turkey have an oil/gas reserve like the EU? Iran may be willing to plough a few million barrels of oil into Turkey at reduced prices to gain market share (as they are expected to do in Asia once sanctions are lifted), or Turkey may invest in Kurdish (Iraqi Kurdistan - who they are largely amicable with, not the Syrian Kurds) oil?

If both countries are in as tough a position as we think, then that's just more of an argument in favour that no escalation need occur.

Also, regarding the highlighted part, do you have any reading material? As I understand it, the Turkish are trying to fund oil projects in Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan (the Azeri oil is supposed to flow mid 2018?).

glued wrote: »

With regards the power plant; The Russians were the only ones willing to finance and build the project via private Russian investors.

Didn't the French, Japanese and Brazilian carry out surveys/feasibility studies regarding nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia a few months ago? Surely someone would be willing to build this nuclear plant (I chose France because they are practically the go-to country for nuclear power in Europe, even the Brits contract them to help build plants).

IrishTrajan

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Do you honestly think that a NATO member will carry out an operation independently without getting the nod of approval from head office?

So, you don't have any proof?

Gatling

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Didn't the French, Japanese and Brazilian carry out surveys/feasibility studies regarding nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia a few months ago? Surely someone would be willing to build this nuclear plant (I chose France because they are practically the go-to country for nuclear power in Europe, even the Brits contract them to help build plants).

China comes to mind

Elmer Blooker

IrishTrajan wrote: »

So, you don't have any proof?

NATO is at war with the Kurds. Don't ask again for proof, thanks.

All members of 28-nation military alliance gave their full support to Ankara

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3177032/Massive-explosion-cripples-Turkish-gas-pipeline-revenge-attack-Kurdish-rebels-NATO-meets-discuss-Ankara-s-campaign-against-ISIS-militants.html

Iwasfrozen

So Russia is up to it's old tricks again in violating NATO airspace? Could be time for more sanctions.

Gatling

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

So Russia is up to it's old tricks again in violating NATO airspace? Could be time for more sanctions.

Doubt it might have to wait to see what happens in Ukraine for the next while at least ,

If they had any sense they should impose no fly zones from Iraq ,Turkey and Isreal .

Iwasfrozen

karma_ wrote: »

Listen to you, Turkey has messed up here, it's fairly obvious that shooting down a non-hostile states aircraft is tantamount to a declaration of war. Turkey are in NATO and you yourself have argued for them to be allowed into the EU. What exactly are Turley playing at? They are reckless, they support ISIS, materially and financially... what is going on in that part of the world?

Violating NATO airspace is a declaration of war. For the sake of peace both sides should sit down and come to an agreement that airspace will not be violated in future.

Iwasfrozen

Gatling wrote: »

Doubt it might have to wait to see what happens in Ukraine for the next while at least ,

If they had any sense they should impose no fly zones from Iraq ,Turkey and Isreal .

Who should impose a no fly zone in Syria?

IrishTrajan

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

NATO is at war with the Kurds. Don't ask again for proof, thanks.




http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3177032/Massive-explosion-cripples-Turkish-gas-pipeline-revenge-attack-Kurdish-rebels-NATO-meets-discuss-Ankara-s-campaign-against-ISIS-militants.html

Clearly you think the Iraqi, Syrian, Turkish, and Iranian Kurds are all the same, and that NATO condemning an attack on their own member by a terrorist group, somehow means all of them are attacking the Kurds.

You're delusional. If NATO was at war with the Kurdish, they wouldn't have pounded IS into dust and helped the Kurds take Sinjar.

Gatling

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Who should impose a no fly zone in Syria?

That's the problem,

The UN won't be allowed unless they change how they do business and get rid of vetoes ,

Nato possibly could if they wanted they would have no opposition outside of the Russians,

For instance turkey ,iraq and Isreal all border syria and a large combined modern airforce they could set a several hundred mile excursion zone close to each of their respective borders ,
But it would take a fairly large diplomatic effort for anyone to get involved,

Iwasfrozen

Gatling wrote: »

That's the problem,

The UN won't be allowed unless they change how they do business and get rid of vetoes ,

Nato possibly could if they wanted they would have no opposition outside of the Russians,

For instance turkey ,iraq and Isreal all border syria and a large combined modern airforce they could set a several hundred mile excursion zone close to each of their respective borders ,
But it would take a fairly large diplomatic effort for anyone to get involved,

Wouldn't work. The Russians would ignore it.

Gatling

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Wouldn't work. The Russians would ignore it.

29 planes not a lot they could do in theory against a combined force of several airforces .

But it would prove massively difficult to get everyone on board

Iwasfrozen

Gatling wrote: »

29 planes not a lot they could do in theory against a combined force of several airforces .

But it would prove massively difficult to get everyone on board

I don't say they'd be fighting, they'd just ignore the no fly zone while they're bombing rebels. And what is NATO going to do? One thing to shoot a plane out of the sky when it strays into NATO airspace, another matter to shoot them down deep inside Syria.

Shurimgreat

According to some reports many Russian attack planes carry no more than ordinary GPS devices held to the plane using an elastic band.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/these-russian-attack-jets-use-walmart-grade-gps-systems-1703048443

Slightly worrying.

Gatling

Shurimgreat wrote: »

According to some reports many Russian attack planes carry no more than ordinary GPS devices held to the plane using an elastic band.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/these-russian-attack-jets-use-walmart-grade-gps-systems-1703048443

Slightly worrying.

Wonder if they know there been lit up by radar locks

Iwasfrozen

Shurimgreat wrote: »

According to some reports many Russian attack planes carry no more than ordinary GPS devices held to the plane using an elastic band.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/these-russian-attack-jets-use-walmart-grade-gps-systems-1703048443

Slightly worrying.

That's great, good old Russkys