ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't You like to get bombed by BZ though?
Russian jet shot down by Turkey
- Thread starter natro.hydro
- Start date
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
We don't get involved in your conflicts, we're the guy in the bar enjoying his drink in peace staying out of the fight.
If the Muslims tried to ban the drink tho, they'd have an all out war on their hands, and I guarantee we've a better bomb making fraternity than theirs
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
Google BZWe don't get involved in your conflicts, we're the guy in the bar enjoying his drink in peace staying out of the fight.
If the Muslims tried to ban the drink tho, they'd have an all out war on their hands, and I guarantee we've a better bomb making fraternity than theirs
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Seems to be related to scopolamine, watched a Vice episode on that, seriously fucked up stuff.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
I think it's more related to acid or mdma
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
In that case it's been a while, but if everyone else is gonna do some...
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
You were correct
reddan1981
Well-Known Member
Never said it has bud.
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
Iran has evidence of illegal oil trade between Turkey and Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) – and is ready to deliver the information to Ankara and the public, a state official said. Tehran has gathered photos and video footage of oil trucks entering Turkey.
https://www.rt.com/news/324810-iran-proof-isis-oil-turkey/
On Friday, an unnamed US State Department official confirmed to Reuters that the Russian photos of thousands of oil tanker trucks in Syria were authentic.
However, the official stressed that he hasn’t seen “the imagery of the border crossing with trucks crossing the border, and that’s because I don’t believe that exists.”
The [Russian] spokesman advised the American side to have a look through the videos, which were also presented by the Russian Defense Ministry, showing “how the tanker trucks not only drive through checkpoints at the Turkish border, but pass through them without even stopping.”
If the Russian evidence is not enough, the US and its allies should look at the footage from their own state-of-the art drones, “the number of which has recently tripled above the Turkish-Syrian border and oil-rich areas controlled by the terrorists,” he said.
Russia’s claims were denied by both Ankara and Washington, with Colonel Steve Warren, a spokesman for the US-led coalition, calling Turkey “a great partner.”
https://www.rt.com/news/324872-russia-us-isis-oil-turkey/
- there are other sources besides RT. If shit hits the fan I wonder if Greece will jump into the fray, or if the country is too tired, poor, and hungry to fulfill any prophecies.
https://www.rt.com/news/324810-iran-proof-isis-oil-turkey/
On Friday, an unnamed US State Department official confirmed to Reuters that the Russian photos of thousands of oil tanker trucks in Syria were authentic.
However, the official stressed that he hasn’t seen “the imagery of the border crossing with trucks crossing the border, and that’s because I don’t believe that exists.”
The [Russian] spokesman advised the American side to have a look through the videos, which were also presented by the Russian Defense Ministry, showing “how the tanker trucks not only drive through checkpoints at the Turkish border, but pass through them without even stopping.”
If the Russian evidence is not enough, the US and its allies should look at the footage from their own state-of-the art drones, “the number of which has recently tripled above the Turkish-Syrian border and oil-rich areas controlled by the terrorists,” he said.
Russia’s claims were denied by both Ankara and Washington, with Colonel Steve Warren, a spokesman for the US-led coalition, calling Turkey “a great partner.”
https://www.rt.com/news/324872-russia-us-isis-oil-turkey/
- there are other sources besides RT. If shit hits the fan I wonder if Greece will jump into the fray, or if the country is too tired, poor, and hungry to fulfill any prophecies.
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
No idea if the forum ate my last post or what, but here's another article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/af...es-Turkish-forces-48-hours-leave-country.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/af...es-Turkish-forces-48-hours-leave-country.html
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
N.Korea science and tech center^
Remember when I mentioned North Korea's threat?
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...uclear-test-Kim-Jong-Un-assassination-attempt
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
Less than 19 hours until we find out whether or not WWIII begins with the downing of this jet.
2ANONYMOUS
Well-Known Member
We condemn all use of chemical weapons.
But the U.S. used chemical weapons against civilians in Iraq in 2004. Evidence
Israeli also used white phosphorous in 2009 during “Operation Cast Lead” (and perhaps subsequently). Israel ratified Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (“Protocol III”) – which outlaws the use of incendiary devices in war – in 2007. So this was a war crime.
Moreover, the 1925 Geneva Protocol (which is different from Protocol III) prohibits “the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases”.
The use of White phosphorus (“WP”) may also be a war crime under other international treaties and domestic U.S. laws. For example, the Battle Book, published by the U.S. Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, contains the following sentence: “It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.”
The U.S. National Safety Council states that “White phosphorus is a poison . . . If its combustion occurs in a confined space, white phosphorus will remove the oxygen from the air and render the air unfit to support life . . . It is considered a dangerous disaster hazard because it emits highly toxic fumes. The EPA has listed white phosphorus as a Hazardous Air Pollutant.
Indeed, it is interesting to note that the U.S. previously called white phosphorous a chemical weapon when Saddam used it against the Kurds. Interestingly, it has just come out that the U.S. encouragedSaddam’s use of chemical weapons.
Moreover, the U.S. and Britain have been dropping depleted uranium in virtually every country they fight, which causes severe health problems.
And Israel has been accused of using depleted uranium in Syria.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. But it is hypocritical for the U.S., Britain and Israel to say that we should bomb Syria because the government allegedly used chemical weapons.
But the U.S. used chemical weapons against civilians in Iraq in 2004. Evidence
Israeli also used white phosphorous in 2009 during “Operation Cast Lead” (and perhaps subsequently). Israel ratified Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (“Protocol III”) – which outlaws the use of incendiary devices in war – in 2007. So this was a war crime.
Moreover, the 1925 Geneva Protocol (which is different from Protocol III) prohibits “the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases”.
The use of White phosphorus (“WP”) may also be a war crime under other international treaties and domestic U.S. laws. For example, the Battle Book, published by the U.S. Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, contains the following sentence: “It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.”
The U.S. National Safety Council states that “White phosphorus is a poison . . . If its combustion occurs in a confined space, white phosphorus will remove the oxygen from the air and render the air unfit to support life . . . It is considered a dangerous disaster hazard because it emits highly toxic fumes. The EPA has listed white phosphorus as a Hazardous Air Pollutant.
Indeed, it is interesting to note that the U.S. previously called white phosphorous a chemical weapon when Saddam used it against the Kurds. Interestingly, it has just come out that the U.S. encouragedSaddam’s use of chemical weapons.
Moreover, the U.S. and Britain have been dropping depleted uranium in virtually every country they fight, which causes severe health problems.
And Israel has been accused of using depleted uranium in Syria.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. But it is hypocritical for the U.S., Britain and Israel to say that we should bomb Syria because the government allegedly used chemical weapons.
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
Assad didn't authorize. Bad intelligence or an attempted Gulf of Tonkin incident.
Also, prepare for WWIII in about 18 hours.
2ANONYMOUS
Well-Known Member
Russia is not the only country that violates Turkish airspace. Greek and Turkish jets regularly violate each other’s airspace, yet Turkey is not shooting down any Greek planes. In other words, there is something uniquely disturbing in the Turkish decision to shoot down the Russian plane: This is neither routine Turkish behavior, nor a typical NATO reaction. Furthermore, with history in mind, Ankara ought to be aware that the odds that it could win a military confrontation with Russia on its own are close to nil.
Turkey’s aggressive posture vis-à-vis Russia can be explained through the war in Syria, where Ankara and Moscow have diametrically opposing policies. Since 2011, Turkey’s Syria policy has had one premise: ousting the Assad regime, which Russia has conversely and successfully bolstered. Thus far, Ankara’s Syria policy has failed and Moscow’s has succeeded.
With Russia backing Assad in Syria, it is clear that his regime will not fall. Ankara has not yet admitted this failure publicly, but in reality Turkey has already downgraded the intensity of its Syria policy.
Turkey’s Syria policy now aims to secure Ankara a seat at the table when negotiations are held for Syria’s future. This can only happen if Turkish-backed rebels continue to hold on to strategic zones in northwestern Syria. This gives further significance to the recent Russian airstrikes against these rebels. Such attacks threaten to debilitate these rebel groups, and simultaneously undermine Turkey’s recently downgraded Syria policy.
It is this fear of being shut out of Syria by Russian attacks on Turkish-aligned rebels that has induced Turkey to posture so aggressively against Russia, and which led to the hair-trigger shootdown last Friday. The question now is: How does Moscow react? While Russia is the only neighbor Ankara truly fears, the Russians consider Turkey a historic nuisance that cannot be allowed to come between it and its goals. Hence, Moscow will settle for nothing less than Turkey standing down in Syria as well as a full apology from Ankara. To date, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu have both ruled out an apology.
In the coming days, Russia could launch a set of retaliatory steps designed to humiliate Ankara. With this in mind, Russia will target northwestern Syria with increased vigor to root out Turkish-backed rebels. Putin’s dream now is to drive these rebels out of Syria, a scenario that would mean complete defeat of Ankara’s Syria policy. This would also potentially create a massive new wave of refugees, adding to Turkey’s current burden of nearly 2.5 million refugees.
Russia could also use asymmetrical warfare against Ankara, which might, unfortunately for Turkey, include support to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) that Ankara is fighting.
Russia could also provide weapons to the PKK’s Syrian franchise, the Party for Democratic Unity (PYD), which has been aiming to capture a nearly 60-mile stretch of territory (the Jarablus–Azaz corridor) along the Turkish–Syrian border to link its two enclaves in northern Syria. Russian assistance would allow the PYD to establish a 400-mile-long pro-PKK cordon abutting Turkey from the south — with Moscow’s backing.
If a Russian–Turkish crisis escalates, this will have momentous ramifications: Turkey will react to the Russian moves with a potentially historic move.
Washington needs to prepare for Turkey’s potential next steps. After a decade of trying to become a Middle East player in its own right, Ankara may now find comfort in the NATO alliance when faced with the historic Russian menace, pivoting closer to the United States.
Alternatively, Turkey could try to retaliate against Moscow’s moves, escalating the war in Syria by bringing in Central Asian, Chechen, and other North Caucasus proxies to fight against Russia in Syria. Such a policy could find resonance with the Turkish nationalist and Islamist constituencies of the Erdogan-Davutoglu administration in Ankara, further boosting their drive for an autarchic foreign policy.
Either way Turkey turns, Ankara could be at the precipice of a major foreign policy decision: When Russia howls, Turkey moves.
Turkey’s aggressive posture vis-à-vis Russia can be explained through the war in Syria, where Ankara and Moscow have diametrically opposing policies. Since 2011, Turkey’s Syria policy has had one premise: ousting the Assad regime, which Russia has conversely and successfully bolstered. Thus far, Ankara’s Syria policy has failed and Moscow’s has succeeded.
With Russia backing Assad in Syria, it is clear that his regime will not fall. Ankara has not yet admitted this failure publicly, but in reality Turkey has already downgraded the intensity of its Syria policy.
Turkey’s Syria policy now aims to secure Ankara a seat at the table when negotiations are held for Syria’s future. This can only happen if Turkish-backed rebels continue to hold on to strategic zones in northwestern Syria. This gives further significance to the recent Russian airstrikes against these rebels. Such attacks threaten to debilitate these rebel groups, and simultaneously undermine Turkey’s recently downgraded Syria policy.
It is this fear of being shut out of Syria by Russian attacks on Turkish-aligned rebels that has induced Turkey to posture so aggressively against Russia, and which led to the hair-trigger shootdown last Friday. The question now is: How does Moscow react? While Russia is the only neighbor Ankara truly fears, the Russians consider Turkey a historic nuisance that cannot be allowed to come between it and its goals. Hence, Moscow will settle for nothing less than Turkey standing down in Syria as well as a full apology from Ankara. To date, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu have both ruled out an apology.
In the coming days, Russia could launch a set of retaliatory steps designed to humiliate Ankara. With this in mind, Russia will target northwestern Syria with increased vigor to root out Turkish-backed rebels. Putin’s dream now is to drive these rebels out of Syria, a scenario that would mean complete defeat of Ankara’s Syria policy. This would also potentially create a massive new wave of refugees, adding to Turkey’s current burden of nearly 2.5 million refugees.
Russia could also use asymmetrical warfare against Ankara, which might, unfortunately for Turkey, include support to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) that Ankara is fighting.
Russia could also provide weapons to the PKK’s Syrian franchise, the Party for Democratic Unity (PYD), which has been aiming to capture a nearly 60-mile stretch of territory (the Jarablus–Azaz corridor) along the Turkish–Syrian border to link its two enclaves in northern Syria. Russian assistance would allow the PYD to establish a 400-mile-long pro-PKK cordon abutting Turkey from the south — with Moscow’s backing.
If a Russian–Turkish crisis escalates, this will have momentous ramifications: Turkey will react to the Russian moves with a potentially historic move.
Washington needs to prepare for Turkey’s potential next steps. After a decade of trying to become a Middle East player in its own right, Ankara may now find comfort in the NATO alliance when faced with the historic Russian menace, pivoting closer to the United States.
Alternatively, Turkey could try to retaliate against Moscow’s moves, escalating the war in Syria by bringing in Central Asian, Chechen, and other North Caucasus proxies to fight against Russia in Syria. Such a policy could find resonance with the Turkish nationalist and Islamist constituencies of the Erdogan-Davutoglu administration in Ankara, further boosting their drive for an autarchic foreign policy.
Either way Turkey turns, Ankara could be at the precipice of a major foreign policy decision: When Russia howls, Turkey moves.
pnwmystery
Well-Known Member
Do you guys not know the history of Russian airspace violation with Turkey? Turkey has routinely asked Russia not to. Russia has bombed Turkmen rebels in Syria which Turkey views as an attack on the Turkish people. Moreover before this incident when Russian aircraft violated Turkish airspace, Turkish planes intercepted the Russians and then sent a warning that any further violations would result in "grave consequences." This isn't like Turkey decided to one day say "Fuck it." Turkey has continuously told Russia not to do it. This is exactly what Russia did to Georgia except this time they decided to play with fire. Moreover with the Russian economy in the slumps a video of a Russian SU-24 going down in flames after an engagement with a US made aircraft is just bad for business.
There are already Central Asian and Chechens fighting for Daesh, al-Nusra, and the FSA it just all depends on how hardline they are/how much they hate Russia after a long history of abuse.
Let's also just forget about the few Russian nationals who've been buying Daesh's oil and Putin's lack of prosecution/what he usually does to political opponents.
Additionally Iraq will not be able to do a thing against Turkey. Turkey's military is much more advanced than Iraq's in just about every aspect.
There are already Central Asian and Chechens fighting for Daesh, al-Nusra, and the FSA it just all depends on how hardline they are/how much they hate Russia after a long history of abuse.
Let's also just forget about the few Russian nationals who've been buying Daesh's oil and Putin's lack of prosecution/what he usually does to political opponents.
Additionally Iraq will not be able to do a thing against Turkey. Turkey's military is much more advanced than Iraq's in just about every aspect.
2ANONYMOUS
Well-Known Member
until Iraq asks Russia to step in then good by Turkey
tanks that is and who ever stands in the way..But again Turkey is relying on NATO to back em up but lets not forget with turkey ilegally invading iraq ?? Nato might step down in support
and Turkey will then rely on USA in which USA i would bet will turn there backs on Turkey as well , USA does not want or caan afford another war speciallly when its presidential campaign time might go bad for obama to start sending troops back in and Again Iraq does not wat Nato in there country so its a win win for Putin
Lord Kanti
Well-Known Member
Iraq? They're authorizing Russia to bomb any Turk standing on Iraqi soil once the deadline is reached. Iraq doesn't need an airforce when they've contacted Russia to clean house. There's what, fifteen hours left? How fast can a Turk run in sand?
