Turkey shoots down Russian fighter jet

[saxitoxin]

This was a war crime, plain and simple. Russia has an inherent, legal right of self-defense,

Russia has long maintained the right to shoot down any planes, even harmless civilian planes, that violate its airspace, even accidentally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaleva_%28airplane%29

Soviet not Russian, why you are not looking for accidents before WWI?

The same gang of OGPU thugs that has been running Russia for 98 years is still running Russia. They can change their name, but that sadistic look comes through in the eyes. You look into the eyes of Putin and it is no different than looking into the eyes of Beria.

lol. And when me hip starts a-hurtin', that's how ah know here's gone be rainin' soon!

[GoranZ]

[saxitoxin]

[Bernie Sanders]

Two tyrants, true love.

[GoranZ]

Kremlin Aware of Erdogan Son's Interest in Oil Business. Too bad projihadists like Bernie are chearing for the evil ISIS

Bernie Sanders view for US

[saxitoxin]

NATO PM BLASTS TURKEY FOR ATTACK ON RUSSIAN PLANE!

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras has attacked his Turkish counterpart on Twitter after the downing of a Russian plane, prompting an admonishing reply.

Mr Tsipras posted four tweets on Sunday addressed to Ahmet Davutoglu, complaining about Turkish violations of Greek airspace.

"Fortunately our pilots are not mercurial as yours against the Russians," his first tweet read.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34962348

Just the latest laugh in the infamous "NATO Unity!" tour!

[GoranZ]

Unknown Men Hurl Molotov Cocktails at Turkish Cultural Center in France

So when will Turkey join EU? Never

[AndyDufresne]

--Andy

[GoranZ]

WikiLeaks: Turkey Planned Su-24 Downing Six Weeks Before the Incident?

[waauw]

WikiLeaks: Turkey Planned Su-24 Downing Six Weeks Before the Incident?

If this is true, which I'm not ready to claim yet, then Erdogan is worse than previously thought.

[GoranZ]

WikiLeaks: Turkey Planned Su-24 Downing Six Weeks Before the Incident?

If this is true, which I'm not ready to claim yet, then Erdogan is worse than previously thought.

Probably, the problem is that he is not very smart, or better said he is dumb as a mule, as any Islamist... As a result of downing of SU-24 now Russians deployed their most advanced versions of S-300 and S-400 in Syria and are able to scan F-22 in combat conditions. Data from those scans will probably be used for adequate upgrade of those systems for better combat against most advanced US planes.

I think that Russians traded one SU-24 for treasure-chest of data about various western planes. I presume the price of S-300 and S-400 just went up, and price of every western plane went down

[patches70]

WikiLeaks: Turkey Planned Su-24 Downing Six Weeks Before the Incident?

If this is true, which I'm not ready to claim yet, then Erdogan is worse than previously thought.

Oh that's nothing. There is a lot of evidence that Turkey has been conducting illegal oil trade with ISIS, that is pretty much beyond doubt at this point. What the real question is how much did the US know about this illegal oil trade. The evidence is showing that the US did know all about it, thus the reason ISIS hasn't been destroyed.

Russia submitted evidence of the illegal oil trade and the US acknowledged that it was indeed ISIS tankers hauling oil. What the US disputed was that there was no evidence that the oil was going to Turkey. The Russians then promptly submitted detailed drone footage of ISIS trucks rolling right through checkpoints at the Turkish border. This isn't one or two trucks, this is dozens and even hundreds of ISIS trucks rolling through Turkish checkpoints and weren't even stopped.
It is hard to believe that with the extensive drone coverage the US has in the area that they never picked up on this troubling fact.

Then there are the declassified Pentagon reports that characterize ISIS as a strategic asset against Assad and the Shia bloc fighting over Syria. The report mentioned nothing about giving aid to ISIS directly, but that it was in US strategic interest that groups such as ISIS exist because it puts more pressure on Assad. This explains why after fourteen months of the US air campaign not a single ISIS oil tanker was hit until the Russians exposed the entire illegal oil trade being conducted by ISIS. Then and only then did the US actually start targeting the ISIS oil trade. Even then the US dropped leaflets warning of the attacks forty five minutes before the attacks so that no ISIS personnel would be killed.

The excuses given were that the US wanted to avoid loss of life. The actual excuse given publicly just two weeks ago as to why the US hadn't targeted ISIS oil production until now (fourteen months later) was to avoid environmental damage. Everyone has to ignore the Pentagon's report about how ISIS is an asset because it doesn't fit into the narrative of ISIS being the evil enemy of all humanity.
What I am wondering is how Parisians would feel that all those innocent Parisians died because the US needed ISIS and the other extreme Islamist groups to pursue corporate economic interests in Syria rather than destroying ISIS and the Jihadists months ago. The illegal oil trade is vital for ISIS, which is only a paltry 50,000 BpD at $20 a barrel, that's their income needed to fund their caliphate. This has been going on for nearly two years and only since the Russians intervened is that cash flow being challenged finally. You wanna crush ISIS then you choke out their funding, seems pretty cut and dry. But all those Parisians died because the US and Turkey don't want ISIS to lose that oil revenue just yet, not until Assad is gone.

I don't know about the rest of you, but that is just FUBAR. Assad didn't attack Paris, Assad is actually fighting for his life and the life of his country against not just ISIS but also against groups that are just as bad. But somehow in this comedy of errors it's Assad and Russia that are the bad guys.
Obama criticizes Russia for not targeting ISIS enough makes me do a face palm because the US hasn't done jack shit against ISIS' main revenue source until the Russians finally exposed the whole illicit oil trade of the new Caliphate.
All those Parisians had to die because the US thinks Assad is a greater evil than ISIS. How does everyone feel about that?

[jgordon1111]

The almost amusing thing is as smart as some of you seem, all anyone cares about is a small piece here and there. Try for once looking at the overall big picture, who in the big picture gains the most?

[patches70]

The almost amusing thing is as smart as some of you seem, all anyone cares about is a small piece here and there. Try for once looking at the overall big picture, who in the big picture gains the most?

Who do you think gains the most?

The list is long, but not nearly as long as the list of who suffers.

[Dukasaur]

WikiLeaks: Turkey Planned Su-24 Downing Six Weeks Before the Incident?

If this is true, which I'm not ready to claim yet, then Erdogan is worse than previously thought.

Oh that's nothing. There is a lot of evidence that Turkey has been conducting illegal oil trade with ISIS, that is pretty much beyond doubt at this point. What the real question is how much did the US know about this illegal oil trade. The evidence is showing that the US did know all about it, thus the reason ISIS hasn't been destroyed.

Russia submitted evidence of the illegal oil trade and the US acknowledged that it was indeed ISIS tankers hauling oil. What the US disputed was that there was no evidence that the oil was going to Turkey. The Russians then promptly submitted detailed drone footage of ISIS trucks rolling right through checkpoints at the Turkish border. This isn't one or two trucks, this is dozens and even hundreds of ISIS trucks rolling through Turkish checkpoints and weren't even stopped.
It is hard to believe that with the extensive drone coverage the US has in the area that they never picked up on this troubling fact.

Then there are the declassified Pentagon reports that characterize ISIS as a strategic asset against Assad and the Shia bloc fighting over Syria. The report mentioned nothing about giving aid to ISIS directly, but that it was in US strategic interest that groups such as ISIS exist because it puts more pressure on Assad. This explains why after fourteen months of the US air campaign not a single ISIS oil tanker was hit until the Russians exposed the entire illegal oil trade being conducted by ISIS. Then and only then did the US actually start targeting the ISIS oil trade. Even then the US dropped leaflets warning of the attacks forty five minutes before the attacks so that no ISIS personnel would be killed.

The excuses given were that the US wanted to avoid loss of life. The actual excuse given publicly just two weeks ago as to why the US hadn't targeted ISIS oil production until now (fourteen months later) was to avoid environmental damage. Everyone has to ignore the Pentagon's report about how ISIS is an asset because it doesn't fit into the narrative of ISIS being the evil enemy of all humanity.
What I am wondering is how Parisians would feel that all those innocent Parisians died because the US needed ISIS and the other extreme Islamist groups to pursue corporate economic interests in Syria rather than destroying ISIS and the Jihadists months ago. The illegal oil trade is vital for ISIS, which is only a paltry 50,000 BpD at $20 a barrel, that's their income needed to fund their caliphate. This has been going on for nearly two years and only since the Russians intervened is that cash flow being challenged finally. You wanna crush ISIS then you choke out their funding, seems pretty cut and dry. But all those Parisians died because the US and Turkey don't want ISIS to lose that oil revenue just yet, not until Assad is gone.

I don't know about the rest of you, but that is just FUBAR. Assad didn't attack Paris, Assad is actually fighting for his life and the life of his country against not just ISIS but also against groups that are just as bad. But somehow in this comedy of errors it's Assad and Russia that are the bad guys.
Obama criticizes Russia for not targeting ISIS enough makes me do a face palm because the US hasn't done jack shit against ISIS' main revenue source until the Russians finally exposed the whole illicit oil trade of the new Caliphate.
All those Parisians had to die because the US thinks Assad is a greater evil than ISIS. How does everyone feel about that?

Your first point, I think, is completely correct. Yes, ISIS could have been destroyed at the beginning, but was allowed to grow because it was useful to the U.S. in hurting Assad. They didn't realize, just as they didn't realize with la-Qaeda in Afghanistan, that the tool would outgrow the workshop. This much is pretty well established now and not in question.

Your second point, I think, is a little more questionable. Was the oils smuggling through Turkey permitted because the U.S. was sheltering ISIS, or just because Turkey is a NATO ally and it was their baby? I think by the time ISIS controlled significant oil fields, the U.S. had already tired of it and was no longer interested in protecting it. To openly break with a NATO ally, however, would be a serious matter, perhaps more serious than anything about Syria. Not attacking the oil smugglers might be nothing more than reluctant acquiescence to a key ally's wishes.

Your third point, I think, is more questionable still. The Paris attackers might have been connected with ISIS, but I don't think they were bought by ISIS. All the reports suggest that the attacks were largely a homegrown phenomenon, born of unemployed Arab youth in European ghettoes. Of the attackers who have been positively identified, all were European citizens and the majority were European-born. The evidence suggests that their radicalization occurred in Europe, and although some of them travelled to Syria and fought for ISIS, they were already committed to radical Islam before that. ISIS is just the current centerpiece for Arab terrorists. If these people had come of age 15 years ago, they might have proclaimed themselves members of al-Qaeda instead. If they had come of age 30 years ago, they might have sworn allegiance to Abu Nidal. I don't think there's any direct causative connection between ISIS' oil money and the attacks.

[jgordon1111]

The almost amusing thing is as smart as some of you seem, all anyone cares about is a small piece here and there. Try for once looking at the overall big picture, who in the big picture gains the most?

Who do you think gains the most?

The list is long, but not nearly as long as the list of who suffers.

Patches I would think that you might know better than ask me a question such as this,won't do it. Each of you must open your own eyes and draw your own (learned) not (taught) conclusions. My point every time every thread.to those of you with a smile or smirk on your face right now, I don't promote my opinion as being the correct one whether you agree or not what I do promote is learn who's opinion is correct and why?

[owenshooter]

everyone knows you don't mess with turkey...



the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir

[GoranZ]

Your second point, I think, is a little more questionable. Was the oils smuggling through Turkey permitted because the U.S. was sheltering ISIS, or just because Turkey is a NATO ally and it was their baby? I think by the time ISIS controlled significant oil fields, the U.S. had already tired of it and was no longer interested in protecting it. To openly break with a NATO ally, however, would be a serious matter, perhaps more serious than anything about Syria. Not attacking the oil smugglers might be nothing more than reluctant acquiescence to a key ally's wishes.

Your third point, I think, is more questionable still. The Paris attackers might have been connected with ISIS, but I don't think they were bought by ISIS. All the reports suggest that the attacks were largely a homegrown phenomenon, born of unemployed Arab youth in European ghettoes. Of the attackers who have been positively identified, all were European citizens and the majority were European-born. The evidence suggests that their radicalization occurred in Europe, and although some of them travelled to Syria and fought for ISIS, they were already committed to radical Islam before that. ISIS is just the current centerpiece for Arab terrorists. If these people had come of age 15 years ago, they might have proclaimed themselves members of al-Qaeda instead. If they had come of age 30 years ago, they might have sworn allegiance to Abu Nidal. I don't think there's any direct causative connection between ISIS' oil money and the attacks.

If they lived in the middle ages they would have fought against the Crusades
You miss the whole point, ISIS today, Al Qaeda 10 years ago, some other in the next 10 years... But the idea is the same, JIHAD, and it deserves to be killed.

[Bernie Sanders]

Your second point, I think, is a little more questionable. Was the oils smuggling through Turkey permitted because the U.S. was sheltering ISIS, or just because Turkey is a NATO ally and it was their baby? I think by the time ISIS controlled significant oil fields, the U.S. had already tired of it and was no longer interested in protecting it. To openly break with a NATO ally, however, would be a serious matter, perhaps more serious than anything about Syria. Not attacking the oil smugglers might be nothing more than reluctant acquiescence to a key ally's wishes.

Your third point, I think, is more questionable still. The Paris attackers might have been connected with ISIS, but I don't think they were bought by ISIS. All the reports suggest that the attacks were largely a homegrown phenomenon, born of unemployed Arab youth in European ghettoes. Of the attackers who have been positively identified, all were European citizens and the majority were European-born. The evidence suggests that their radicalization occurred in Europe, and although some of them travelled to Syria and fought for ISIS, they were already committed to radical Islam before that. ISIS is just the current centerpiece for Arab terrorists. If these people had come of age 15 years ago, they might have proclaimed themselves members of al-Qaeda instead. If they had come of age 30 years ago, they might have sworn allegiance to Abu Nidal. I don't think there's any direct causative connection between ISIS' oil money and the attacks.

If they lived in the middle ages they would have fought against the Crusades
You miss the whole point, ISIS today, Al Qaeda 10 years ago, some other in the next 10 years... But the idea is the same, JIHAD, and it deserves to be killed.

...and Russian aggression in The Ukraine.

[owenshooter]

...and Russian aggression in The Ukraine.

no! no! no! he does not want you to point that one simple and obviously glaring fact out!!!-Jésus noir

[GoranZ]

Your second point, I think, is a little more questionable. Was the oils smuggling through Turkey permitted because the U.S. was sheltering ISIS, or just because Turkey is a NATO ally and it was their baby? I think by the time ISIS controlled significant oil fields, the U.S. had already tired of it and was no longer interested in protecting it. To openly break with a NATO ally, however, would be a serious matter, perhaps more serious than anything about Syria. Not attacking the oil smugglers might be nothing more than reluctant acquiescence to a key ally's wishes.

Your third point, I think, is more questionable still. The Paris attackers might have been connected with ISIS, but I don't think they were bought by ISIS. All the reports suggest that the attacks were largely a homegrown phenomenon, born of unemployed Arab youth in European ghettoes. Of the attackers who have been positively identified, all were European citizens and the majority were European-born. The evidence suggests that their radicalization occurred in Europe, and although some of them travelled to Syria and fought for ISIS, they were already committed to radical Islam before that. ISIS is just the current centerpiece for Arab terrorists. If these people had come of age 15 years ago, they might have proclaimed themselves members of al-Qaeda instead. If they had come of age 30 years ago, they might have sworn allegiance to Abu Nidal. I don't think there's any direct causative connection between ISIS' oil money and the attacks.

If they lived in the middle ages they would have fought against the Crusades
You miss the whole point, ISIS today, Al Qaeda 10 years ago, some other in the next 10 years... But the idea is the same, JIHAD, and it deserves to be killed.

...and Russian aggression in The Ukraine.

You mean the pro-Nazi regime installed by US... But this is not a thread about Ukraine, search for it and post there.

...and Russian aggression in The Ukraine.

no! no! no! he does not want you to point that one simple and obviously glaring fact out!!!-Jésus noir

I would write something but you will cry like little baby, jut like you did about waauw post.
So if you cant handle it, GET LOST.

[Bernie Sanders]

Your second point, I think, is a little more questionable. Was the oils smuggling through Turkey permitted because the U.S. was sheltering ISIS, or just because Turkey is a NATO ally and it was their baby? I think by the time ISIS controlled significant oil fields, the U.S. had already tired of it and was no longer interested in protecting it. To openly break with a NATO ally, however, would be a serious matter, perhaps more serious than anything about Syria. Not attacking the oil smugglers might be nothing more than reluctant acquiescence to a key ally's wishes.

Your third point, I think, is more questionable still. The Paris attackers might have been connected with ISIS, but I don't think they were bought by ISIS. All the reports suggest that the attacks were largely a homegrown phenomenon, born of unemployed Arab youth in European ghettoes. Of the attackers who have been positively identified, all were European citizens and the majority were European-born. The evidence suggests that their radicalization occurred in Europe, and although some of them travelled to Syria and fought for ISIS, they were already committed to radical Islam before that. ISIS is just the current centerpiece for Arab terrorists. If these people had come of age 15 years ago, they might have proclaimed themselves members of al-Qaeda instead. If they had come of age 30 years ago, they might have sworn allegiance to Abu Nidal. I don't think there's any direct causative connection between ISIS' oil money and the attacks.

If they lived in the middle ages they would have fought against the Crusades
You miss the whole point, ISIS today, Al Qaeda 10 years ago, some other in the next 10 years... But the idea is the same, JIHAD, and it deserves to be killed.

...and Russian aggression in The Ukraine.

You mean the pro-Nazi regime installed by US... But this is not a thread about Ukraine, search for it and post there.

...and Russian aggression in The Ukraine.

no! no! no! he does not want you to point that one simple and obviously glaring fact out!!!-Jésus noir

I would write something but you will cry like little baby, jut like you did about waauw post.
So if you cant handle it, GET LOST.

[GoranZ]

Putin is anti gay


But you are still rapist

[GoranZ]

Russian Su-24's Black Box has been recovered... It will reveal the actual path of the airplane, and whether it was or not in Turkish airspace.

Putin: Su-24's Black Box to Reveal Truth About Jet Shot Down by Turkey

[Bernie Sanders]

Russians and Assad have no problem bombing and killing civilians

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/syria-monitoring-groups-russian-air-strikes-kill-400-civilians-151122063024984.html

Russia has recent history of atrocities against civilians in neighboring countries and in their own country.