ISIS/ISIL conflict in Syria/Iraq (No OpEd, No Politics)

plawolf said:

The first 'reason' would be nothing more than an excuse.

Click to expand...

In essence...I agree completely.

plawolf said:

I had already voiced my belief that the reason the Turks did this is to pre-emptively sabotage any hope of the French and Russians forming a broad based international coalition with UN mandate to destroy ISIS and other terrorists groups operating in Syria.

Click to expand...

I agree with this as well, which in turn would undermine any efforts to get the US to go along with it if they could force some kind of Russian-NATO standoff.

plawolf said:

The only reason it had the balls to use such a flimsy pretext to shoot down the Russian fighter is because it is expecting the rest of NATO to stand with it and shield it from the consequences of its own highly questionable actions.

Click to expand...

I think it is highly unlikely that NATO will agree to fight for Turkey over any such action.

But Russia will have to be careful in how it responds.

If the response in any way were viewed as over the top and wholly disproportionate...then Russia would risk giving Turkey what it hopes for.

plawolf said:

The US and other major NATO members should set a clear precedent and example that membership of NATO and US Ally status does not grant you a free pass to do what you like irrespective of international laws and norms, and so you cannot expect the US and NATO to come pay the butchers' bill for you when you are clearly the aggressor and in the wrong.

Click to expand...

I agree 100% with this...and have the same hope regarding it.

plawolf said:

The US and other major NATO members should set a clear precedent and example that membership of NATO and US Ally status does not grant you a free pass to do what you like irrespective of international laws and norms, and so you cannot expect the US and NATO to come pay the butchers' bill for you when you are clearly the aggressor and in the wrong.

Click to expand...

There's Artcile 5th my hero. I bet you don't know what that's about so I advice you to check it. Sorry for the tone but you should know about that living in a country that's NATO member.

Janiz said:

There's Artcile 5th my hero. I bet you don't know what that's about so I advice you to check it. Sorry for the tone but you should know about that living in a country that's NATO member.

Click to expand...

Well you would have lost that bet.

My last few posts were written specially because of Article 5.

How about you read and try and understand what I wrote first before making unfounded assumptions?

That's the red line you mentioned. Precedent is US in 2001. No Russia ally in Europe is ready to attack Turkey for that also. And I can't read your mind or guess what international agreement you meant when I wrote where it's written.

I am sure the Russian response in the near future will be well calculated, that is "limited", eye for eye perhaps. This is based on the assumption that Russia will not openly link Turkey with terrorists by showing the evidence of oil trade, therefor not esclating.

Regarding the article 5, it depends on many things including the above mentioned "linking Turkey with terrorists with evidence". If that is presented to NATO, it is very hard to invoke article 5 because supporting terrorists is simply out of the question of self-defence.

There is also incidents in the past that escort warships of an openly declared ally abandoned the allied ships when shells began to fall. So that article is countable only if Turkey can convince other NATO members that Turkey is not doing something recklessly.

aksha said:

Terrorist shot Russian pilot on landing with Parachute

Click to expand...

This is freaking disgraceful I'm sorry but no defenseless pilot or person should be shot at like that and these are people we are supposed to be supporting it makes me sick

dtulsa said:

This is freaking disgraceful I'm sorry but no defenseless pilot or person should be shot at like that and these are people we are supposed to be supporting it makes me sick

Click to expand...

Look...it is against the Geneva convention to do so...that is for sure.

But it takes a lot of discipline to follow those rules appropriately at all times...and in battle and combat, it is VERY hard.

We are talking about rebel forces who at best are probably very militia like. They may have seen loved one, or friends and comrades, etc. killed by these...or other pilots...safely far above the battlefield.

Right or wrong, you can see and easily understand how they would kill the people responsible.

This is why war is hell.

Do not think for an instant that if your best friend was just incinerated before your eyes that you would not cheer the aircraft being shot down, and then seeing the guy pulling the trigger floating towards you that you would not be sorely tempted to "return fire" on him, just as he had done on you?

As I said, it takes a very well disciplined and trained army, with a professional non-commissioned officer cardre, to overcome those types of natural instincts..

Air Force Brat said:

Lots of "unfounded", "ill founded", assumptions on this thread today, lots of opinions, threats, and even general nastiness??

I think we can all agree that it is "shameful" to shoot men in parachutes, it is cowardly and shows a lack of "upbringing", now if they draw first???

However, if you were a good Rebel?? (yes, like the ones Russia backed in Crimea), fighting a vastly superior force, you might feel justified in those actions??

Turkeys President is a Moslem, he has begged, pleaded, and threatened Russia to stop violating Turkish airspace, to attack fellow Moslems, who have been active in fighting ISIS. Turkey "warned" Russia, Russia choose to ignore Turkish sovereignty, and Turkey "popped a cap" on em?

Click to expand...

Wasn't it not to long ago that Turkey was thought to be a secular country with mutual respect for all religion and before the current president wasn't he also a secular person

Janiz said:

There's Artcile 5th my hero. I bet you don't know what that's about so I advice you to check it. Sorry for the tone but you should know about that living in a country that's NATO member.

Click to expand...

Is Article 5 a suicide pact? Can a NATO country take unilateral aggressive actions against another sovereign state and expect NATO to pull its chestnuts out of the fire when the aggrieved party retaliates?