Syrian civil war (12 Viewers)
- Thread starter ReBeL
- Start date
Question
So Iraq condemns turkey breaching their border and sending troops over there. Asking for them to retreat and telling they'll step to the UN security council.
source : https://www.rt.com/news/324930-turkish-invasion-iraq-reaction/
But if they demand them to withdraw, and they ignore, can iraq ask the russians to devastate the forces on their behalf, and both get away with it ? Its technically an invasion.
So Iraq condemns turkey breaching their border and sending troops over there. Asking for them to retreat and telling they'll step to the UN security council.
source : https://www.rt.com/news/324930-turkish-invasion-iraq-reaction/
But if they demand them to withdraw, and they ignore, can iraq ask the russians to devastate the forces on their behalf, and both get away with it ? Its technically an invasion.
I do not know what the clear thing you got out of that. Anyway, just for info, the Turkish army is training the "national gathering" there "Al-Hashd Al-Watani" which is a military fraction which is planning to take Mosul city from IS. It is led by Atheel Najeefi, the previous Mosul mayor. Is it still clear for you?
There is a military agreement between Iraq and Turkey since 1994 that Turkish army can enter the Iraqi lands for a specific area (I think 20 Kms) to chase the military fighters of PKK. Turks are acting in accordance with that agreement that was signed by the previous regime in Iraq, and the previous ruling party in Turkey. As a result, there is no invasion at all. The biggest thing that Iraqi regime can do is stopping that agreement. Turks are not stupid to get themselves in such a problem now because Iran and Russia are looking for any justification to hit them.
There is a military agreement between Iraq and Turkey since 1994 that Turkish army can enter the Iraqi lands for a specific area (I think 20 Kms) to chase the military fighters of PKK. Turks are acting in accordance with that agreement that was signed by the previous regime in Iraq, and the previous ruling party in Turkey. As a result, there is no invasion at all. The biggest thing that Iraqi regime can do is stopping that agreement. Turks are not stupid to get themselves in such a problem now because Iran and Russia are looking for any justification to hit them.
A US led airstrike has apparently hit and killed Syrian Government soldiers. Mistake or no, what the hell are the west thinking? They've been reckless in the past but they're taking it to a new level. The aggression against Russia and China, neglecting (even abetting) the expansion of ISIS. The British governments rhetoric on matters involving geopolitical foes lately has often been inflammatory and their deployment of troops on Poland's eastern border was a needless act of aggression.
The west is not willing to loosen it's grip on its hegemony but keeping it is not worth escalating tensions with old rivals. Geopolitics is moving away from the unipolarity of the last 25 years and the US and their coalition need to begin using restraint before tensions boil over ala the worst years of the Cold War.
The west is not willing to loosen it's grip on its hegemony but keeping it is not worth escalating tensions with old rivals. Geopolitics is moving away from the unipolarity of the last 25 years and the US and their coalition need to begin using restraint before tensions boil over ala the worst years of the Cold War.
Like China and the US, Russia are a big nuclear power with their own interests. Since they've recovered from the collapse of the Soviet Union in the last 5-10 years, they've been faced with an ultimatum from the west - get with our program or we'll make you. It should be any sovereign nations prerogative to pursue their interests in the way they please (excluding acts of war of course). Since Russia has been seen to be making it's inevitable recovery to becoming the power it once was and to add, not assimilate to the current world order, the US, the EU and NATO have done everything in their power to curtail Russia's pursuit of their own interests with it's partners.
Since the Arab Spring and the revolution in Ukraine, Russia has lost key allies which were economic partners and military footholds in regions where they already had comparatively little influence. Many of these revolutions are said to have been orchestrated or at least assisted by the US. It's not exactly a crazy conspiracy theory. First, the CIA are well versed in orchestrating coups; second, the majority of these revolutions happened to occur in nations not allied with the west; and third, the US have supported regimes in these nations that have pledged cooperation with the west.
Considering Russia's refusal to integrate into the status-quo had already been met with aggressive rhetoric and harsh sanctions, the concerted effort to influence regime change in the few countries Russia was allied with has naturally been seen as an act of aggression against it. Especially in Ukraine which is important to Russia economically and is a key buffer zone between it and the EU. Now Russia have western aligned states, a number of them NATO signatories, covering it's entire western border. Push back was inevitable. Russia invaded Crimea which is strategically key to them and they're supporting ethnic Russians fight for autonomy in eastern Ukraine. Now Russia is supporting the only established government institution in Syria as well. Hardly disproportionate reactions keeping in mind that NATO have deployed nukes in Turkey and Poland.
Putin is no angel but by contrast, Russia's military activity abroad hasn't even been a fraction as aggressive as the US. They're simply protecting pre-existing interests with old allies, not exponentially expanding them like the west. The US and NATO are still trying to twist Russia's arm and force them into submission but it's a very very dangerous game that they're playing.
Since the Arab Spring and the revolution in Ukraine, Russia has lost key allies which were economic partners and military footholds in regions where they already had comparatively little influence. Many of these revolutions are said to have been orchestrated or at least assisted by the US. It's not exactly a crazy conspiracy theory. First, the CIA are well versed in orchestrating coups; second, the majority of these revolutions happened to occur in nations not allied with the west; and third, the US have supported regimes in these nations that have pledged cooperation with the west.
Considering Russia's refusal to integrate into the status-quo had already been met with aggressive rhetoric and harsh sanctions, the concerted effort to influence regime change in the few countries Russia was allied with has naturally been seen as an act of aggression against it. Especially in Ukraine which is important to Russia economically and is a key buffer zone between it and the EU. Now Russia have western aligned states, a number of them NATO signatories, covering it's entire western border. Push back was inevitable. Russia invaded Crimea which is strategically key to them and they're supporting ethnic Russians fight for autonomy in eastern Ukraine. Now Russia is supporting the only established government institution in Syria as well. Hardly disproportionate reactions keeping in mind that NATO have deployed nukes in Turkey and Poland.
Putin is no angel but by contrast, Russia's military activity abroad hasn't even been a fraction as aggressive as the US. They're simply protecting pre-existing interests with old allies, not exponentially expanding them like the west. The US and NATO are still trying to twist Russia's arm and force them into submission but it's a very very dangerous game that they're playing.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/07/syrian-civilians-killed-us-airstrike
26 civilians and no combatants killed in US airstrike according to the monitoring group the western media has trusted since the beginning of the war. The point is that whoever's dropping the bombs or shooting the guns the losers in war are always civilians, especially the poor.
26 civilians and no combatants killed in US airstrike according to the monitoring group the western media has trusted since the beginning of the war. The point is that whoever's dropping the bombs or shooting the guns the losers in war are always civilians, especially the poor.
So, apparently a turkish guy managed to take a picture of a Russian landership, the Caesar Kunikov, while it was passing trough the bosphorus.
Such ships are used for deploying infantry to land, and are armed with strela-2 Sam and BM-21 Grad rocket launchers.
However, the photographer zoomed in and found out there was a soldier with a portable rocket launcher standing on deck.
Apparently, this is a huge provocation to turkey.
One guy with a rocketlauncher is a provocation, a warship that has 1,000,000 more firepower is normal.
Logic level turki turki
Such ships are used for deploying infantry to land, and are armed with strela-2 Sam and BM-21 Grad rocket launchers.
However, the photographer zoomed in and found out there was a soldier with a portable rocket launcher standing on deck.
Apparently, this is a huge provocation to turkey.
One guy with a rocketlauncher is a provocation, a warship that has 1,000,000 more firepower is normal.
Logic level turki turki
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ing-terrorist-group-al-qaida#comment-65288040
UN devises plan to stop ISIS' funding while taking great pains not to catch any of the wealthy Saudis that fund them. Sounds a little like invading Iraq to stop Al qaeda - can't go after the real culprits, so go after somebody nearby who's sort of similar-ish.
UN devises plan to stop ISIS' funding while taking great pains not to catch any of the wealthy Saudis that fund them. Sounds a little like invading Iraq to stop Al qaeda - can't go after the real culprits, so go after somebody nearby who's sort of similar-ish.
"Jacob Lew, the US treasury secretary, who chaired the meeting on Thursday night, called Isis “a challenging financial target” because unlike other terror groups such as al-Qaida it gets a relatively small share of its funding from donors abroad."
What a fucking idiot. God, can we ever have a good Treasury guy anymore?
What a fucking idiot. God, can we ever have a good Treasury guy anymore?