Turkey sends tanks in syria

[Deleted]

http://www.euronews.com/2016/08/24/t...nks-into-syria



Will they be actively working towards increasing stability or will they just fuel chaos and instability?

I think it is fun to watch two muslim countries, Turkey and ISIS/ISIL, to fight. I'll just have a coffee. It makes me happy.

[Deleted]

You are misinformed, just like rest of the forum.

Not really.

1) Turkey let Peshmerga forces pass through Turkish soil to help reinforce Kobane. So, you are wrong on the part "watching" part.

Yes because there wasn't a Turkish tank column position along the border watching and doing nothing.

2) Even if Turkey didn't let them, it's normal why? First, Kobane fighters were PKK militants and second all Kobane Kurds had sought refugee in Turkey anyway. The town was empty, bar militants between two sides. It was one terrorist organization (PKK) against another (ISIS) for Turkey, a hard situation.

It was - mostly empty.

3) Turkey is not invading anywhere. It's FSA doing the bulk of the fight. Only Turkish special forces and tanks in Cerablus. The former will avoid fight, and there to coordinate Turkish forces.

Turkish armor have crossed the border.

Objective: Clean ISIS forces from Jarabulus, and if necessary push back Kurdish terrorists to the east of Euphrates with force and block so-called "Kurdish Corridor".

Yeah fuck ISIS - Oh wait, that could be misconstrued, Yeah fuck (doing anything about) ISIS.

I hope Turkey doesn't back up, and put down YPG if necessary.

I hope this clusterfuck ends soon.

[Kuntantee]

Not really.

Yes because there wasn't a Turkish tank column position along the border watching and doing nothing.

So you are saying Peshmerga passed through Turkish border, without informing Turks, because no one, in particular Turkish tank unit was watching them? And you think putting an image of a line of Turkish tanks watching the border in some place is a proof? And you say you are not misinformed.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29685830

Stupidity is approaching to a whole new level around here. I am not sure if this is simple lack of reasoning, or pure hatred for Turkey causing people to produce some bullshit ideas.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it is fun to watch two muslim countries, Turkey and ISIS/ISIL, to fight. I'll just have a coffee. It makes me happy.

As fun as "the muslim country" ISIL blowing Christians up in West? If I was completely fucked up in the head, I would probably find Muslim/Christian countries (France/America/Belgium/ISIL) attacking and killing each other fun, and it would probably make me happy. I would probably drink a coffee too while jacking off to corpses.

[Deleted]

So you are saying Peshmerga passed through Turkish border, without informing Turks, because no one, in particular Turkish tank unit was watching them?

No I'm saying that Peshmerga is not the Elite Kurdish division of the Turkish army.
And that's pretty much my entire point start to finish - Turkey invades to keep Kurd's from taking a city on its border, but gave zero fucks about ISIS taking a City on its border.
And here you can read all about that picture:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...are-worst.html

[Kuntantee]

Turkey invades to keep Kurd's from taking a city on its border

This is accurate, and is a problem in what way?

but gave zero fucks about ISIS taking a City on its border.

YPG is a bigger threat than ISIS to Turkey's best interests, but Turkey has been actively targeting ISIS for years now. You can't really claim Turkey gives no fuck.

[Deleted]

This is accurate, and is a problem in what way?
YPG is a bigger threat than ISIS to Turkey's best interests, but Turkey has been actively targeting ISIS for years now. You can't really claim Turkey gives no fuck.

Isis took the City in 2013.
Do i even need to say anything more?

[Kuntantee]

Isis took the City in 2013.
Do i even need to say anything more?

This operation would be conducted last year, if it wasn't for Russia not letting Turkish jets fly over Syria. Besides, ISIS taking city in 2013 is irrelevant. They were dead-locked in Jarabulus anyway. Now is the correct time, diplomatically speaking and operation was started.

[Deleted]

This operation would be conducted last year, if it wasn't for Russia not letting Turkish jets fly over Syria. Besides, ISIS taking city in 2013 is irrelevant. They were dead-locked in Jarabulus anyway. Now is the correct time, diplomatically speaking and operation was started.

Yeah, because what is important is not to keep the death-cult that is ISIS from taking a border town, its keeping the entity you are nominally allied with from taking it.

[Kuntantee]

Yeah, because what is important is not to keep the death-cult that is ISIS from taking a border town, its keeping the entity you are nominally allied with from taking it.

What is the entity you are referring as "nominally allied with"? Also, why do you blame Turkey for not fighting with ISIS. Is there any party other than Kurdish terrorists that fights with ISIS?

[Skroe]

The US fucking invaded Iraq - I think they have levers to pull without starting a fucking rebellion.

I agree with your post mostly, but I do just want to say that the key problem the US has right now is it has a President who is morally opposed to the entire concept of "leverage" and "using it".

So much about Syria... Ukraine... the South China Sea... begins and ends with Barack Obama's inability to come to terms with the fact he is at the head of, to quote Bill Clinton "a fucking Superpower", and use the immense resources at this country's disposal to set conditions, set terms, and make new realities on the ground. Hell look what Putin and Xi Jinping have done, with a fraction of the resources. Agree or disagree with with their policies (clearly my opinions are known), they've played weak hands well and defined new realities, because the guy they were playing with refuses to play the game or admit it is important. Barack Obama would be much happier being the Prime Minister of Iceland or Ireland or Portugal or something.

I know Obama is popular in Europe, but I'd take almost any President over the last 75 years over this navel gazing joke of a man. My favorite story of Obama is how during the worst of the 2008 financial crisis when McCain called for a Oval Office Meeting with Bush, Obama and Wall Street executives, what ended up happening is McCain showed up to this "crisis meeting" with no ideas, no position, and no clue. Obama on the other hand, ex-community organizer and academic lawyer, began lecturing some of the most successful and powerful businessmen and finaceers on Planet Earth on fundamental economics.

He is not a serious person, and it's really no surprise how under his watch, the terrible trio have utterly gone to fucking hell. At least Hillary will have some realist steel to her. Though to be fair, I think almost anybody would do better than our timid C-in-C. The US has tons of leverage in Syria and the region. But the guy in charge just doesn't want to use it. So he sends his pet idiots out to pretend we have no leverage. It's all bunk.

[Deleted]

What is the entity you are referring as "nominally allied with"?

That would be the Kurds, who are getting air support from a Turkish airbase -

- - - Updated - - -

Though to be fair, I think almost anybody would do better than our timid C-in-C. The US has tons of leverage in Syria and the region. But the guy in charge just doesn't want to use it. So he sends his pet idiots out to pretend we have no leverage. It's all bunk.

He may have moved from too timid to 'bat shit crazy' mode in the last days though.
Because apparently he let either the pentagon or his press secretary declare a no fly over Syria.
That's going to end badly.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Syria has been warned not to fly warplanes in areas where American troops are advising Kurdish and Arab forces fighting the Islamic State group, the Pentagon said on Monday. But it insisted this does not amount to a "no fly zone."

The double speak is strong (but that is sadly not the problem)
The problem is that not that this is retarded policy to begin with, It is but whatever, No the problem is, that its 'weak' - Ultimately, I doubt that the ROE actually permits them to escalate against Syrian targets, and certainly not Russian targets - Which then brings us to the problem, what happens when either party decides to test this, so as to not set the precedent that there is in fact a No fly?
Well we don't know.
Because is this an affirmed position of the president? - No clue.
At best, it would be another red line moment.
At worst, The Syrian cluster-fuck just got clusterfuckier.
They should either privately made it abundantly clear and then not said anything publicly, or Obama should have said it personally.
But right now? - Its maybe a red line, don't know, it is inflammatory daring them to do something, Oh and it makes it harder to rein in the Kurds, which really should have been the key option -

[Deleted]

I think it is fun to watch two muslim countries, Turkey and ISIS/ISIL, to fight. I'll just have a coffee. It makes me happy.

One is not a muslim country and the other is not a country.

[caervek]

When ISIS used an American SAM to bring down a Russian rescue helicopter nobody really cared because it was Russia, but I wonder how the media will react if a NATO member starts losing tanks/etc to American equipment.

[Kuntantee]

That would be the Kurds, who are getting air support from a Turkish airbase

YPG are not allies of Turkey in any shape or form. If YPG is getting air support from Incirlik, that's because we have a spineless leader ruling the country.

[Skroe]

That would be the Kurds, who are getting air support from a Turkish airbase -

- - - Updated - - -



He may have moved from too timid to 'bat shit crazy' mode in the last days though.
Because apparently he let either the pentagon or his press secretary declare a no fly over Syria.
That's going to end badly.

The double speak is strong (but that is sadly not the problem)
The problem is that not that this is retarded policy to begin with, It is but whatever, No the problem is, that its 'weak' - Ultimately, I doubt that the ROE actually permits them to escalate against Syrian targets, and certainly not Russian targets - Which then brings us to the problem, what happens when either party decides to test this, so as to not set the precedent that there is in fact a No fly?
Well we don't know.
Because is this an affirmed position of the president? - No clue.
At best, it would be another red line moment.
At worst, The Syrian cluster-fuck just got clusterfuckier.
They should either privately made it abundantly clear and then not said anything publicly, or Obama should have said it personally.
But right now? - Its maybe a red line, don't know, it is inflammatory daring them to do something, Oh and it makes it harder to rein in the Kurds, which really should have been the key option -

The double speak is strong because Obama's been burned once in Syria and he doesn't want to be burned again. Also reportedly his Commanders are pretty much at wits end with his civilian White House NSC team, Susan Rice and her ongoing crazy beliefs first and foremost. Remember, John Kerry is really more of an Ambassador-at-Large and Ash Carter (who I am a big fan of) is really the Secretary of Defense for Procurement. Susan Rice is the real combined unified Foreign Policy-Defense policy captain. She's Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, Brent Scowcroft or Condoleezza Rice without the brains or the talent. It's a joke that she is in her position when you look at esteemed company she is among. One of the great minds of American foreign policy, she most certainly is not. Hell, just BECAUSE of her, the next President's National Security Advisor will have to be approved by the Senate thanks to the pending 2017 NDAA. Congress actually wrote in a "No-More-Susan-Rices" provision.

We talk about the Iraq War as the greatest foreign policy catastrophe of the past 25 years for the US. Generally true. But it was also on TV and the internet, for a solid 10 years. Every disaster in slow drip. Very public.

Obama letting Assad cross the red line? A low profile but practical disaster on the same scale. US Diplomats have been cleaning that mess up for years. They will be doing it for years more. It caused our allies to doubt us (and more recently, Trump isn't helping). Even domestically, it acted to basically zero Obama's political power. Everyone saw Obama for what he was - the guy who wasn't a man of his word and would buckle. The Syrian red line annihilated any political capital Obama gained from his 2012 reelection just a year before.

Obama's double speak comes from wanting to avoid a repeat episode with something clear. He'll order Syrian jets to be shot down. But Russian? Even though he absolutely should (and really, he should, because nothing will do more remind folks that there is only one military superpower in the world, and we're not afraid to use that power, than having some F-22s shoot down some Su-35s and watch when Putin does nothing), he won't. Because he wants to get out of office with a certain rep and a certain legacy. You may have heard he had considered unilaterally declaring that the US would forswear the right to launch a Nuclear First Strike at his big UN speech next month? Apparently that's off the table (in favor of pushing Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty ratification), but he's trying to exit office with a foreign policy legacy... something of a legacy anyway... that papers over how Syria has been an utter clusterfuck for him since 2013.

The US has 150 aircraft, of whicha bout 40 are strike-fighters, in Turkey, and another 60 off the cost on a carrier, and more in Kuwait, Jordan and Qatar. That's more than enough for a no-fly-zone.

The US should absolutely throw one up and make clear to Russia, that includes them. Obama won't. Hillary though? Here's hoping. Because the Russians won't do shit, but Obama refuses to even play the whole high stakes poker game.

[hellhamster]

I wonder what caused Russia and USA to drop support for Kurds this hard. This gives Turkey free reign to clear house all along the border.

[Deleted]

One is not a muslim country and the other is not a country.

Wrong. Both are muslim countries.

[Skroe]

I wonder what caused Russia and USA to drop support for Kurds this hard. This gives Turkey free reign to clear house all along the border.

The Turks matter more to the US than the Kurds and always will.

Hasn't (and in the future won't) stop us from using them as leverage against the Turks though. Not with Obama of course. But with his successors.

Turkey has always been a royal pain in the ass for US Security and Foreign Policy. Even pre-Erdogan. It's just the way the arrangement works. It's fine. They're worth it. The results are worth it. Playing the Turks off of their (in truth entirely unfounded) fears of a Kurdistan is a historically useful for us.

[Deleted]

YPG are not allies of Turkey in any shape or form. If YPG is getting air support from Incirlik, that's because we have a spineless leader ruling the country.

I'm sorry, but if aircraft based out of your country gives air support to the YPG, you - Nominally - allied.

[caervek]

The US has 150 aircraft, of whicha bout 40 are strike-fighters, in Turkey, and another 60 off the cost on a carrier, and more in Kuwait, Jordan and Qatar. That's more than enough for a no-fly-zone.

The US should absolutely throw one up and make clear to Russia, that includes them. Obama won't. Hillary though? Here's hoping. Because the Russians won't do shit, but Obama refuses to even play the whole high stakes poker game.

There are a couple of big problems with that idea:

1: The first is legality, the only reason the US are conducting airstrikes in Syria against the wishes of Syria in the first place is because they claim that under international law because ISIS is attacking Iraq and Syria appears unable to stop them they are allowed to attack ISIS in order to defend Iraq (note, the US's legal claim hasn't actually been tested in court and doesn't look to be).

While that loophole may be good enough to hold up in the eyes of the international community, the idea that "we need a no fly zone, because ISIS have at least TWO broken MiG-21!" would simply not. There is no way to even approach trying to claim any legality for a no fly zone when A: the enemy has no air force, B: your own air presence in the country is of dubious legality and C: the countries own air force and that of it's allies* are operating in that airspace.

*Does anyone know if Iran are still bombing ISIS along with Syria or is it Russia now?


2: The second, if the US does try that, firstly there is no way they come out looking like anything but warmongering bad guys, and add to that, what happens when Russia/Syria call their bluff and fly anyway? Either the US does nothing, or they shoot down a Syrian plane in direct violation of international law, or even worse they shoot down a Russian plane. That not only creates a legal nightmare but it means the Russians may use their AA equipment in Syria to down a US plane in response, and how does that factor with the US targeting the AA equipment (again, highly illegal).

Unless Trump becomes president I really don;t see nay of that happening.