Thread: Russia bombs Turks in Syria, Turkey bombs Russians in Syria

So the Turks have bombed Syrian troops with their drones as well.

I wonder if Vlad would get involved in a Turkish/Syrian war?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

So the Turks have bombed Syrian troops with their drones as well.

I wonder if Vlad would get involved in a Turkish/Syrian war?

Can't see it coming to that, bad boy knows he can push only so far before he's pushed back, and also that he's close to if not already overreached. Syria is not going to cede any gains around Idlib, period, so Erdogan is wasting his time and expendable Turkish lives trying to manoeuvre into a position of strength which might allow him to trade his Idlib gains for Kurdish lands. Meanwhile the Kurds, small fry in this game, are also under Putin's protection as the enemy of my enemy.

If it comes to it, while trading blow for blow will bizarrely earn Erdogan huge popularity back home by coming a distant second, Russia doesn't need to face off militarily against Turkey. Recent soft US sanctions against Turkey caused its economy to shake, and serious sanctions would devastate it, but Russian sanctions could also play havoc with the Turk economy. The problem with this is it puts the US between that rock and a hard place, politically unable to support Russia, and also unable to justify supporting bad boy.

And the EU position? Same same, scared, head down and hope nobody notices, can't support Russia and also can't validate support for Erdogan, with fingers eyes and legs crossed that it doesn't get too messy because of his control of the refugee floodgates.

Btw, while fatigue has removed refugee crossings from the headlines, the flow has not stopped over the years, it's just been reduced and ignored by the msm.

Erdogan is framing his actions as defence of Syrians.

Has he developed a conscience?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I wonder if Vlad would get involved in a Turkish/Syrian war?

He already has.

Maverick, out-of-control authoritarian leaders – and here we are talking about Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey’s president – tend to think they know best about everything, and are fiercely intolerant of criticism. It is this hubris that has finally led Erdoğan and Turkey to the brink of disaster in Syria after nine years of bombastic threats, proxy conflict and direct military intervention. Erdoğan is now isolated on all sides, sharply at odds with other major players in the Syrian crisis. Having sent an extra 7,000 troops and armour into Idlib last month to reinforce existing military outposts, Turkey has plunged in open warfare with Bashar al-Assad’s regime. It has attacked airports and radar sites well behind the de facto “frontline”. It has declared all regime “elements” to be legitimate targets.
In mid-2011, when the Arab spring uprisings were just getting going, Ahmet Davutoğlu, then Turkey’s foreign minister, met Assad in Damascus and urged him to discuss the demonstrators’ demands. Assad refused. Davutoğlu later told me the Syrian leader just wouldn’t listen. The chance was lost. As Assad’s crackdown intensified, Erdoğan threw Turkey’s weight behind the rebels, including Islamist groups.

But what is happening now in north-west Syria is no longer a proxy war. It is a direct confrontation between the two heavily armed neighbouring states. And it threatens to draw Turkey deeper into military conflict with Russia, Assad’s principal ally. Erdoğan’s spokespeople and the pro-government media continue to suggest that last Thursday’s debacle, when 33 Turkish soldiers were killed in an attack on their convoy in Idlib, was the fault of the Syrian regime.

It’s hard to know the facts, given Erdoğan’s suppression of independent journalism. But the truth seems to be very different. The death toll may have totalled up to 55, according to Metin Gurcan, a military analyst writing for the respected online regional platform al-Monitor. Local reports speak of up to 100 dead. It also seems likely the majority of the deaths were caused not by Syrian jets but by deliberate, follow-up Russian airstrikes.

Erdoğan has declined to blame Russia, and the Kremlin has flatly denied responsibility. But the sequence of events last Thursday, which began with Turkish attacks on Russian aircraft flying over southern Idlib, suggests otherwise. The Turkish fire, involving man-portable air-defence systems (Manpads), also threatened Russia’s strategic Khmeimim base.

Infuriated Russian commanders – or maybe the order came from Moscow – appear to have drawn a line after weeks of lethal sparring. The Turkish convoy was hit late in the afternoon that same day. In the hours that followed, with injured soldiers in urgent need of medical aid, Moscow rejected Ankara’s request to open Idlib’s airspace to allow an evacuation, Gurcan reported.

Was Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, intent on teaching Erdoğan a harsh lesson? If so, it seems to have worked. Erdoğan is now pinning his hopes on a face-to-face meeting with the Russian leader to prevent more, costly collisions that Turkey cannot win. He will travel to Moscow on Thursday in search of a ceasefire – after Putin agreed to make time for him.

Yet Putin may be in no mood to back off. He badly wants an end to the Syrian war, where Russian forces have been engaged for nearly five years at considerable financial and human cost. He wants a victory for his client, Assad, in Idlib, the last rebel-held province, and for his own expansionist regional policies. He wants to declare a landmark strategic triumph at the west’s and particularly the US’s expense.

Putin’s price for letting Erdoğan off the hook may be a full or partial Turkish withdrawal from Idlib but also from other Turkish-occupied Syrian territory west of the Euphrates – and from the Kurdish-dominated north-east region that he controversially invaded last autumn. Erdoğan’s always unworkable idea of maintaining quasi-permanent “safe zones” inside Syria to which refugees in Turkey can, in theory, return looks to be dead or dying.

The intrinsic weakness of Erdoğan’s house-of-straw strategy has been further exposed by the inability of the Islamist extremists he supports in Idlib to resist the recent Syrian-Russian advance; and by the refusal of the US and Nato to come to his assistance in any meaningful way. Turkey appealed for support after last week’s convoy calamity. Only limited help with surveillance and intelligence-sharing was offered.

Once again, Erdoğan is reaping what he sowed. He has repeatedly mocked and criticised Nato, the US and European leaders in vituperative and contemptuous terms. He bought a Russian air-defence system over strong American objections. He has jeopardised the west’s fight against Islamic State by waging war on Syria’s Kurds. And he has tried to weaponise the Syrian refugee crisis to bend the EU to his will –hence the current chaos and misery on the Greece-Turkey border. Unsurprisingly, domestic opposition is growing, spurred by the Syrian quagmire.

As the Idlib crisis intensified in recent months, Erdoğan claimed his sole purpose was to uphold a 2018 partial truce and prevent another mass refugee influx into Turkey. These are reasonable aims. But his aggressive tactics and angry rhetoric, as usual, have proved self-defeating. A million displaced, hungry and terrified Idlib residents may soon have no defence at all against Assad’s pitiless advance.

The humbling of Turkey is no cause for cheer in Europe and the US. What it does do is underscore its responsibility – so far shamefully ducked – to intervene directly in the Idlib crisis to protect civilians, halt the fighting, and pursue a wider peace. Leaving it to Erdoğan was never going to work. The western democracies have a last chance to do the right thing in Syria: manufacture and enforce a just and lasting settlement – and tell Putin and his bombers to go home.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ey-syria-assad

Originally Posted by SimonTisdall-TheGuardian

The western democracies have a last chance to do the right thing in Syria: manufacture and enforce a just and lasting settlement – and tell Putin and his bombers to go home.

Quite. I think the West has other things to worry about. It's a shame, but history will put the body count on Putin.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I can only assume you are kidding.

Originally Posted by Plan B

Post up some links

try this:

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

be a good little twat and go and google

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

history will put the body count on Putin.

How quaint.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Quite. I think the West has other things to worry about. It's a shame, but history will put the body count on Putin.

That would be the usual made up history and historic perspective, thereof.....

Originally Posted by HuangLao

That would be the usual made up history and historic perspective, thereof.....

Fuck off Jeff, this is way outside your 50 IQ-level blabbering.

Originally Posted by OhOh

How quaint.

Call it what you like, it's the truth.

Without Putin, Assad's minority regime would be have been out on its arse a long time ago, and Syria would be a majority Sunni democracy by now (not having any Sheikhs and all).

Instead it's going to remain a seething mass of sectarian hatred long after you have shuffled your mortal coil.

It isn't a minority regime. Assad the Opthalmologist should give you a set of decent specs. In Assad's Syria Sunni, Shiite, Christian co-exist peacefully. Who sold you those Al Qaeda goggles?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Without Putin, Assad's minority regime would be have been out on its arse a long time ago, and Syria would be a majority Sunni democracy by now (not having any Sheikhs and all).

Did you forget some smileys or....

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Without Putin

Syria would be a peaceful democracy, something like the Afghans, Iraqis, Lybians have been enjoying. And booking for a free date in Doha for a signing ceremony with .... (left out for filling in later) ...

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Syria would be a peaceful democracy, something like the Afghans, Iraqis, Lybians have been enjoying.

Not even so, Klondyke

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

(not having any Sheikhs and all).

But a Calif

Originally Posted by sabang

It isn't a minority regime. Assad the Opthalmologist should give you a set of decent specs. In Assad's Syria Sunni, Shiite, Christian co-exist peacefully. Who sold you those Al Qaeda goggles?

Do you know how long the Assad family has ruled Syria?

No, you don't.

Have you ever even heard of Hama?

No, you don't.

You don't know the demographics of the country and you clearly don't know the history.

Originally Posted by helge

Did you forget some smileys or....

No I forgot that most people don't have a fucking clue that Tunisia was the first Arab Spring country, its leader was pressured out before he could do an Assad, and they just finished their second parliamentary and presidential elections.

Next?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Do you know how long the Assad family has ruled Syria?

No, you don't.

Have you ever even heard of Hama?

No, you don't.

You don't know the demographics of the country and you clearly don't know the history.

well, we all know that you are a racist kunt full of spite and prejudice

Harry:
You compare Tunis and Syria ?
Are you a total ignorant ?
You could use Iraq instead; demographics fits better.

And your "without Putin" comment.He wasn't the first to step into that quagmire, but reluctantly, I must say that it seems he got us out of the claws of your IS democrats.

Sadly the syrians will still have the dungeons of Assad after this is over, and there will be bills to be paid internaly

Still, no Caliphat

Originally Posted by helge

Harry:
You compare Tunis and Syria ?
Are you a total ignorant ?
You could use Iraq instead; demographics fits better.

You're an idiot.

Iraq and Syria are almost diametrically opposite. Iraq is 65% Shi'a and Syria is ~75% Sunni.

If you can't even get these basics right, you should really stop calling anyone else "a total ignorant" (and I'd trying writing English properly, too).

And your "without Putin" comment.He wasn't the first to step into that quagmire, but reluctantly, I must say that it seems he got us out of the claws of your IS democrats.

If Putin hadn't backed Assad in defiance of the UN, he would have fallen (or rather, probably scarpered to Iran) very quickly.

The reason Islamic State were able to transit from Iraq into Syria is because Putin, by backing Assad, essentially let it become a failed state.

And you seem to think Sunni Islam equates to Islamic State, which further demonstrates that you are absolutely fucking clueless.

Sadly the syrians will still have the dungeons of Assad after this is over, and there will be bills to be paid internaly

Still, no Caliphat

No-one wants a CALIPHATE (I'll just assume you would have got it right at the third time of asking) except the tiny minority of homicidal nutters that were born in response to Shi'a payback in Iraq after Bush invaded.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Iraq and Syria are almost diametrically opposite. Iraq is 65% Shi'a and Syria is ~75% Sunni.

And both ruled by the minority(remember Saddam?)

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

If you can't even get these basics right, you should really stop calling anyone else "a total ignorant"

I heard you were the copy/paste expert, so guess you are excused for not being able to read between the lines

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

(and I'd trying writing English properly, too).

I am better at speaking english, than my teachers were, so that is an A+,Harry
How are you doing at your second/third lanquage?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

And you seem to think Sunni Islam equates to Islamic State, which further demonstrates that you are absolutely fucking clueless.

No, I do not

But you compared a 99% sunni and 98 % arab Tunesia to the sectarian nightmare of Syria

I always took you for a rude, full of yourself type, but your netfinds are quite good

Now go and copy, you little mensjevik (and I only asked if you were a total ignorant)

A large problem is the U.N. which has an inbuilt self neutering clause in the security council, generally administered by Russia, China and the USA. The reason Israel gets away with so many broken UN resolutions.
Sadly, Assad the murdering dictator with the help of Russia will win. Erdogan is a bully but he is no match for Vlad and he knows it.
The U.S. is now next to irrelevant in this conflict, mainly due to the lack of will, mistakes and diplomatic skills of the last Three Presidents. While much can be laid at the feet of Trumpand Obama's Red Line and lost credibility, it started with a total lack of planning post winning the war in Iraq by Bush, proving yet again war solves little in countries where war is seen as a religious duty and a one way trip to Nervana. (See Afghanistan)
These mistakes combining overreaction with under reaction to an abandonment of Allies was the beginning of the end of U.S influence. The Legacy is endless wars of attrition until one side has nothing left.
The E.U. was always a paper tiger and with the loss of Britain is even more so, if that is possible. Its lack of any meaningful collective action in leaving it to the U.S.A to try to fix these intractable problems is the reason why some of the blame also rests with them. Had the E.U. been more involved in Iraq it is possible they would have organised the peace much better, instead of just looking on at the emerging clusterfuck. All of this does not abrogate the responsibility and the abject failure of the United Nations. Sadly the reform needed in the security council is unlikely to ever happen.
Like the E.U. it is a hugely inefficient cost centre, both of which are God's waiting rooms for public servants and ex politicians.

"The U.S. is willing to provide ammunition to Turkey for its operation in Idlib, northwestern Syria, U.S. special envoy for Syria James Jeffrey said Tuesday," Turkey's Daily Sabah reports"

US Will Provide Turkey Ammunition For Idlib, Says Top Envoy | Zero Hedge

Originally Posted by OhOh

"The U.S. is willing to provide ammunition to Turkey for its operation in Idlib, northwestern Syria, U.S. special envoy for Syria James Jeffrey said Tuesday," Turkey's Daily Sabah reports"

US Will Provide Turkey Ammunition For Idlib, Says Top Envoy | Zero Hedge

Can't see that happening, wouldn't put my shirt on anything the Daily Sabah reports, promises of support from the WH are not worth much, and even so it's not ammo bad boy needs but a way to escape the mess he got himself and Turkey into. He has boxed himself in with these ridiculous actions in and around Idlib, his ego may have discounted Russian involvement, now has his tail between his legs, no sympathy from his neighbours having distanced them with his ambitious antics, while the US would love to see him keel over which means NATO will not step in to save his sorry ass, esp since the forces in Idlib and surrounding areas that he feigns to 'liberate' are a mishmash of jihadists.

The EU are more or less irrelevant in this conflict having opted to stay safely on the sidelines early on and failing to consider the likely consequences to them if it goes badly for him, that he will not hesitate to play the refugee card.

His top card aside from NATO, geographical location, still scares the EU; Greece, their front line, is standing firm having announced last week that they are going to impose strict border controls, while Bulgaria, another front line, together with Greece have sent troops to their borders with Turkey. The EU's once proud open borders policy is in tatters, because now it's not only about protecting Europe's borders against another flood of refugees but also containing the CVirus. Greek and Bulgarian troops at the border sounds serious but won't work esp under media scrutiny, while Erdogan is happy enough to sacrifice the last drop of refugee blood knowing the EU is soft and cannot stomach negative publicity; and there are plenty of other routes, but best Europe can do is try.

Back to Turks in Syria: while some on here cringe at the thought that someone they don't like might actually be credited with positives, two of Putin's strengths that stand out from interviews and autobiographies, and which he highly credits toward his success, are a) loyalty to those that are loyal to him, and b) his standing principle when in a position of strength, to offer your opponent a way out, some opportunity to retreat either gracefully or with less damaging consequences than if they do not take that opportunity.

In bad boy's case, Putin has consistently offered Erdogan a way out to lessen the effects of staying, while Erdogan has just as consistently resisted, relying on his bladder and crossed fingers that enough pressure would persuade the Russians to signal Assad to accept and start negotiating from the status quo, so that he could prise something for the crowd back home. Not sure where he expected that pressure to come from, it would take more than the presence of Turkish troops.

What happens next is anyone's guess, but bad boy got this far by being ruthless, unreasonable, and unpredictable; while this works against pussies, not sure Putin is impressed.

Originally Posted by jabir

In bad boy's case, Putin has consistently offered Erdogan a way out to lessen the effects of staying, while Erdogan has just as consistently resisted,

Couldn't imagine another supporting "dictator" involved in such a mess who would have more patience on his way to salvage the sovereign state.

What is he lacking: the muscle speeches full of BS as the others (please no names here) like to show off...