Downing of Su-24 preplanned provocation -Russia

originally posted by: Britguy
If violating another nations airspace is such a big issue, then why haven't the Israelis been hammered for repeated violation and overflights of Lebanon?

I suspect because:

a) The Lebanese lack the ability to actually do anything about it.
b) Even if they did, they know Israel would likely be an arse about it.

They do complain, though.

originally posted by: Britguy
Why hasn't Turkey been taken to task about their over 2000 violations of Greek airspace in 2014 alone?

It's worth taking them into context...

Firstly, they are both NATO members and behave accordingly. They engage in mock dogfights, but that's it.

Secondly, the maritime border in the Aegean is so convoluted and disputed that both airforces can't help but violate airspace as one island could be Greek and the next Turkish.

originally posted by: Britguy
The fact the Turkish aircraft opened fire after a 17 second alleged incursion does rather suggest they were ready and waiting, rather than being scrambled, which does suggest a pre-planned action.

Yes, from the multiple previous incursions - it somewhat suggests they were sick of being ignored. Of course, there is an element of planning, in so far as they have set procedures for it and launch armed aircraft.

originally posted by: Britguy
Turkey has been the gateway for arms and fighters heading to swell the ISIS ranks from the outset but, they are a NATO member, which suggests NATO complicity in the rise and arming of ISIS, does it not?

No, not really. While you are correct in that they have been less than brilliant in their monitoring of the border, that doesn't extend to culpability by NATO who have no input or control over what happens internally in Turkey.

It's like blaming Greece for being an "IS gateway" into Europe and then blaming NATO for that. Stupid.

originally posted by: Britguy
I am sure all the NATO members are well aware of what Turkey's actions are, and it's been reported often enough, just not in our controlled western media.

Anyone with half a brain and some common sense can see that this causes problems for NATO - and that information is readily available in "western media" if you bother to read and look..

On the one hand, Turkey is an ally and we're obliged to help them - on the other, they are ruled by an autocratic President who is eroding the secular state and is an Islamist himself. But to turn on Turkey and boot them out of NATO would backfire in so many ways that it must be regarded in a "cost/benefit" analysis. Currently, it would be far too costly to punish Turkey for it's behaviour for both the Alliance and the general fight against IS.

originally posted by: Logman
Ah poor Turkey. And how many Syrian aircraft has Turkey shot down in recent years? But no, just focus on the one that Syria shot down.

Er, one? They shot down a UAV as well and a helo.

originally posted by: Logman
Aww, poor Al-Qaeda affiliated Turkmen getting bombed by Russia.

Proof of this? Because they are primarily armed and equipped by the Turks themselves. AQ generally operates further south with the likes of Al Nusra.

originally posted by: Logman
Remember Al-Qaeda? Nah, you don't.

Yes I do, smart arse. Wind your neck in. It doesn't behoove you to make assumptions, it just makes you look silly.

originally posted by: Logman
They are our allies in the great war against the brutal dictator Assad.

Ahh, you're one of the confused... AQ support Al Nusra and they are not supported byu the West. They are supported by Saudi and Qatar though, perhaps that is where your confusion comes from?

originally posted by: Logman
Because we hate brutal dictators and want to spread freedom and democracy right? That policy is going really well in Saudi Arabia!

Irrelevant.

originally posted by: Logman
Just keep pushing the narrative that Putin is bad and Russia violated airspace. Even if true, so what? Is that as bad as Turkey supporting ISIS?

I've not mentioned Putin once and I;ve acknowledged Turkeys own behaviour already. Again, wind your neck, have a cup of tea and perhaps a smoke. Chill out, no need to be a dick.

originally posted by: Logman
Putin is no angel. He's bombing in Syria to further his own regional interests - just like everyone else. But he's supporting Assad

Agreed.

originally posted by: Logman
and NATO and the Gulf States are supporting ISIS. It's hard not to cheer for Putin when those facts are undeniable.

Actually, they are, because you clearly haven't got a clue who's supporting who.

NATO are not supporting IS and there is no state support from the Gulf states for IS, although there is certainly individual support from wealthy types for them.

This is a long article about just how complicit NATO and the Gulf States are in supporting ISIS:

originally posted by: Logman
I don't expect you or Xcathdra to read it as you love ISIS so much.

Dude, I'm not sure why you feel the need to be a colossal douche but it's not going to work. Since when has either myself or X said anything about supporting IS?

originally posted by: Logman
This is a long article about just how complicit NATO and the Gulf States are in supporting ISIS:

A long article on some random website we've never seen before, by some Islamic journalist we've never heard before.

What's this guys credentials? Who backs that website? What's it's credentials?

Or are we simply supposed to take your word for it that it's legit and not simply some op/ed by some random?

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: Logman
This is a long article about just how complicit NATO and the Gulf States are in supporting ISIS:

A long article on some random website we've never seen before, by some Islamic journalist we've never heard before.

What's this guys credentials? Who backs that website? What's it's credentials?

Or are we simply supposed to take your word for it that it's legit and not simply some op/ed by some random?

A quick Google search shows you who he is

en.m.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: sosobad

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: Logman
This is a long article about just how complicit NATO and the Gulf States are in supporting ISIS:

A long article on some random website we've never seen before, by some Islamic journalist we've never heard before.

What's this guys credentials? Who backs that website? What's it's credentials?

Or are we simply supposed to take your word for it that it's legit and not simply some op/ed by some random?

A quick Google search shows you who he is

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Pretty sure his questions were rhetorical and meant as a deflection.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: sosobad

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: Logman
This is a long article about just how complicit NATO and the Gulf States are in supporting ISIS:

A long article on some random website we've never seen before, by some Islamic journalist we've never heard before.

What's this guys credentials? Who backs that website? What's it's credentials?

Or are we simply supposed to take your word for it that it's legit and not simply some op/ed by some random?

A quick Google search shows you who he is

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Pretty sure his questions were rhetorical and meant as a deflection.

I know buddy

a reply to: sosobad

And what an interesting read it is...

Quotes like

"Mr. Ahmed on inspection proved to be a risible individual wedded to half-baked conspiracy-mongering, his 'Institute' a one-room sideshow in the English seaside town of Brighton, and his publisher an outfit called 'Media Monitors Network' in association with 'Tree of Life,' whose now-deceased Web site used to offer advice on the ever awkward question of self-publishing."

or

"In 2014, Discover, an American general audience science magazine, published a blog article by Keith Kloor concerning Ahmed's Guardian article[17] about a supposedly "NASA-sponsored" and funded study of about the collapse of industrial civilisation.[18] Kloor objected to the lack of independent responses to the paper, yet to be published at the time, from other scholars in the field. A second post on the study by Kloor detailed serious reservations by specialists on the collapse study leading to an assertion that Ahmed had made an "uncritical appraisal"

and

"Discover has labelled Ahmed as a "doomer." A December 2013 blog post by Kloor asserts: "Once someone starts down this civilization-is-collapsing road, like Guardian blogger Nafeez Ahmed, it’s hard to stop. If you want a tour guide to the apocalypse, Ahmed is your guy."[21] A March 2014 blog post says: "Like the most warped fundamentalists who exploit tragedy, the merchants of eco-doom also cynically seize on current events. On this score, nobody rivals Nafeez Ahmed"

I could go on, but it seems the guy is widely seen as a colossal pillock - and I'm being kind.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

Not at all - it is a random dude with no credibility on a website no one has heard of, which also has no credibility and we're expected to just swallow what he's written?

As it turns out, thanks to your mate and his link, it would appear that I can safely ignore this guys ramblings as simple yet another internet, tin foil-hat wearer banging his drum to whomever is listening.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: sosobad

And what an interesting read it is...

Quotes like

"Mr. Ahmed on inspection proved to be a risible individual wedded to half-baked conspiracy-mongering, his 'Institute' a one-room sideshow in the English seaside town of Brighton, and his publisher an outfit called 'Media Monitors Network' in association with 'Tree of Life,' whose now-deceased Web site used to offer advice on the ever awkward question of self-publishing."

or

"In 2014, Discover, an American general audience science magazine, published a blog article by Keith Kloor concerning Ahmed's Guardian article[17] about a supposedly "NASA-sponsored" and funded study of about the collapse of industrial civilisation.[18] Kloor objected to the lack of independent responses to the paper, yet to be published at the time, from other scholars in the field. A second post on the study by Kloor detailed serious reservations by specialists on the collapse study leading to an assertion that Ahmed had made an "uncritical appraisal"

and

"Discover has labelled Ahmed as a "doomer." A December 2013 blog post by Kloor asserts: "Once someone starts down this civilization-is-collapsing road, like Guardian blogger Nafeez Ahmed, it’s hard to stop. If you want a tour guide to the apocalypse, Ahmed is your guy."[21] A March 2014 blog post says: "Like the most warped fundamentalists who exploit tragedy, the merchants of eco-doom also cynically seize on current events. On this score, nobody rivals Nafeez Ahmed"

I could go on, but it seems the guy is widely seen as a colossal pillock - and I'm being kind.

Please do go on, those are the only 2 contoversies associated to this man. One from Christopher Hitchens a self labeled soclicist and Marxist and another from discover magazine that I have never heard of. Their actual publishing company specializes more in model train magazines. Calling this man widely regarded as a pillock is a stretch. Looks like you have more critics than he does..... You wanted to know who he is there you go.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

What does one do with a Syrian pinky?

a reply to: sosobad

Christoper Hitchins, who has far more journalistic credentials (New Statesman, The Times and The Atlantic) than this Ahmed chap and you've never heard of Discover? Pull the other one!

See, it comes down to credibility in Journalism and your random dude has none.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: sosobad

Christoper Hitchins, who has far more journalistic credentials (New Statesman, The Times and The Atlantic) than this Ahmed chap and you've never heard of Discover? Pull the other one!

See, it comes down to credibility in Journalism and your random dude has none.

Christopher Hitchens that championed for the a
Iraq war, did he not? The starting reason as to why the ME is so #ed these days. Or counted Tony Blair as one of his good friends? Or before he died still thinks that the war with Iraq was a good idea and showed no remorse? The man may be lauded by people but didn't have a #ing clue what he was on about.

a reply to: sosobad

Regardless of his views on the Iraq War, he has far more journalistic credentials than Mr Random Ahmed and is certainly more experienced in the field of Radical Islam and the Middle East.

Again, you asking me to choose between

1. A journalist with years of experience and credibility
   
2. Some guy who runs a website...
   

Hmmm...

Tough one..

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: sosobad

Regardless of his views on the Iraq War, he has far more journalistic credentials than Mr Random Ahmed and is certainly more experienced in the field of Radical Islam and the Middle East.

Again, you asking me to choose between

1. A journalist with years of experience and credibility
   
2. Some guy who runs a website...
   

Hmmm...

Tough one..

The fact he still to dying day thought that the Iraq war was not only a nessecity but a success shows he hadn't a clue. It was the beginning point of turning the ME into the terrorist cesspool it is now today. They may very well look back at him in 20 years and consider praising him as an embarrassment. Not the first time in history it would have happened.

Eta I know you may have skimmed straight to the bad points on Mr Ahmed but he isn't the uneducated troglodyte you are trying to make him out to be.

a reply to: ken10

and the lack of stars for your posts show who is the ignorant one

What an ignorant thing to say.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Of course he is saying that. Putin is all about image and the fact turkey, a nato member, shot down a russian aiorcraft violating its airspace makes putin look foolish. Even more so since he cant respond.

All he has left is the russian propaganda machine to paint an image of turkey that gains him the support of the russian people. Its the same tactic he used in Georgia... and Ukraine... Belarus and now turkey.

Russia may be a thug political culture but honestly Turkey was a mistake to bring into NATO for this reason.

I guarantee you if this were to go further we would weaken our backing to Turkey.

And yes their politicians have been tied to terrorist financing since the collapse of the Ottaman empire. Currently this administration is very heavily scrutinized as tyranical by the international human rights community as is Russia.

What Turkey did is no different than a police officer shooting someone in a tense situation. Are they "guilty" ? Not really but there was no need for their action in terms of self defence and typical western nation protocol.

The groups of Syrian factions are not innocent peace loving apposition groups in the mountains. There are dozens of ethnic groups and causes having a free for all in Syria. Tactically speaking the mountains are a great place to train, group, and stay hidden. Nobody is innocent here Turkey is sinking there hooks into Syria as well abusing NATO.

I have to agree that 15 or 17 or 20 seconds of air space violation should not be enough cause to down a plane.
But now I think that even 5 seconds of Russian air space will be enough for retaliation.

Turkish incursions into Greek airspace

Over 2000

Aircraft shot down

0

There is certain big boys rules we all play by, none of them include blowing each other out of the sky

www.politico.eu...

greece.greekreporter.com...

www.rt.com...

Edit to add
Whispers winks and nods tells me this stinks to high heaven
Trying to get a screen shot of JPR's (joint personnel recovery) radar feed from a buddy
Won't be able to post it ....but my attitude will be a direct result of that evidence

Wait out

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
a reply to: ken10

and the lack of stars for your posts show who is the ignorant one

What an ignorant thing to say.

Not really, I star posts that I agree with, and in the past probably starred a few of xcathdras posts...On this issue I believe he/she is wrong and I was merely pointing out that imo the lack of stars on his/hers posts on this issue showed that no-one agreed with their view.

originally posted by: AlphaPred
Turkish incursions into Greek airspace

Over 2000

Aircraft shot down

0

There is certain big boys rules we all play by, none of them include blowing each other out of the sky

www.politico.eu...

greece.greekreporter.com...

www.rt.com...

They would have had every right to do so under the law is the response.

Just like I could shoot a twelve year old I caught breaking into my garage. If I am a big enough scumbag to not have regard for human life I can shoot and ask questions later even if my life isn't threatened.

Luckily I am a responsible gun owner. Turkey...not so much.