turkey shoots down russian fighter jet...

[Sasha]

Oh Erdoghan, what have gone and done now?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34907983

[Бай Ганьо]

US-Backed Rebels Release Video Of Dead Russian Pilot http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-24/us-backed-rebels-release-video-dead-russian-pilot

Things are escalating: http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/621677/Reports-Russian-helicopter-shot-down-while-searching-downed-jets

[Aslan]

Erdogan has done something really stupid today. To destroy a plane flown by a potential ally! And don't listen to their bullshit about ''turkish airspace'', Russia didn't violate any rules. They were flying all their planes in Syrian airspace!

Just shows you the bullshit that is the Turkish government. Have these men court-martialed!

[Sasha]

Erdogan has done something really stupid today. To destroy a plane flown by a potential ally! And don't listen to their bullshit about ''turkish airspace'', Russia didn't violate any rules. They were flying all their planes in Syrian airspace!

Just shows you the bullshit that is the Turkish government. Have these men court-martialed!

What potential ally? Turkmen millitias who are provided with turkish air support are being targetted by Syrian troops and russian bombers, it was a matter of time the russians would cross turkisk airspace again (you cant opperate so close to the border with fighter jets without crossing it eventually) and turkey would sieze their chance.
Russia cant afford a war with turkey (as a nato member) and its instrumental to turkeys intestd in syria to prevent russian and syrian jets operating in the border regions and if possible to prevent them opperating at all.

[Aslan]

What potential ally? Turkmen millitias who are provided with turkish air support are being targetted by Syrian troops and russian bombers, it was a matter of time the russians would cross turkisk airspace again (you cant opperate so close to the border with fighter jets without crossing it eventually) and turkey would sieze their chance.
Russia cant afford a war with turkey (as a nato member) and its instrumental to turkeys intestd in syria to prevent russian and syrian jets operating in the border regions and if possible to prevent them opperating at all.

When I mean ''ally'' I mean a temporary war partner (Enemy of my enemy). Geo-politically it was possible until this point if Turkey was smart and built a coalition with both Russia, Syrian Rebels, and Syrian government in order to fight rebels. I was sure the populist Erdogan could sympathize with Putin's own populist strategies and they could've developed a bond, even if Turkey is in NATO. But I was sourly mistaken, yes I do think I overstepped my words when I said ally. But think Russia would've been liked to develop a bond with turkey due to its strategic position in black sea and oil transport. Now with Turkey antagonizing Russia as well, it can be safe to say that Russia is surrounded in all sides by a NATO military presence, which is something Russia doesn't want at all.

In an interview the Russian representative the official stated that war with Turkey was ''Absurd'' which is true given the circumstances. What Russia can do now is to have more of an incentive to bomb Syrian rebel positions in order to allow Government forces to win out. While building a bond with Iran which is already occurring due to the Yemeni civil war.

[Sasha]

But turkeys prime objectives has been the fall of Assad in favour of a Sunni regime and the prevention of a PKK dominated kurdish de facto state on their border, Daesh and al nusra are their best bets to bring about those objectives..
So Russia and the regime are at diametrically positions

[Бай Ганьо]

I wouldn't be surprised if Gazprom were to announce the cancellation of gas deals with Turkey soon.

[Aslan]

But turkeys prime objectives has been the fall of Assad in favour of a Sunni regime and the prevention of a PKK dominated kurdish de facto state on their border, Daesh and al nusra are their best bets to bring about those objectives..
So Russia and the regime are at diametrically positions

Turkey most certainly does not want ISIL militants in their borders or even near them. Turkey is a secular (debatable but true to an extent). The late thing Turkey wants is a destabilized neighbor taken over by a insane terrorist group.

edit: After thinking a little bit I think Sasha is saying the truth. Turkey is intentionally trying to put an illegitimate government in Syria in order to serve it's own geopolitical interests. This is really turning into a proxy war

[Sasha]

I wouldn't be surprised if Gazprom were to announce the cancellation of gas deals with Turkey soon.

Dont know how dependent the turks are on russian gas but last thing russia would want is start an trade war with turkey, do not forget that turkey controlls the bosporus strait which would leave russia essentially landlocked for most of the year (only the black sea harbours and the kalinka enclave and the harbour on the other end of siberia near japan remain ice free). If russia wants to hurt turkey their best bet is is deciding the syrian war quickly in favour of the Assad regime. Whether they can force an desicive victory without boots on the ground is a big question though.

[Sasha]

Turkey most certainly does not want ISIL militants in their borders or even near them. Turkey is a secular (debatable but true to an extent). The late thing Turkey wants is a destabilized neighbor taken over by a insane terrorist group.

Thats just not true, turkish intelligence have been instrumental for the survival of daesh, the way they weaponised them against the HDP during the ellections speaks volums about their relationship.
What is happening now has also to been seen in the fact that russia from the coast/west is about to do what turkey prevented by shelling, the kurds from doing from the east, which is closing the turkish borders for sunni anti-assad forces, the town in question Jarblus is firmly in Daesh hands and is the caliphates life line...

[Aslan]

Dont know how dependent the turks are on russian gas but last thing russia would want is start an trade war with turkey, do not forget that turkey controlls the bosporus strait which would leave russia essentially landlocked for most of the year (only the black sea harbours and the kalinka enclave and the harbour on the other end of siberia near japan remain ice free). If russia wants to hurt turkey their best bet is is deciding the syrian war quickly in favour of the Assad regime. Whether they can force an desicive victory without boots on the ground is a big question though.

I wouldn't be surprised if Turkey sent ground troops to Syria.

[Armchair Partisan]

Turkey most certainly does not want ISIL militants in their borders or even near them. Turkey is a secular (debatable but true to an extent). The late thing Turkey wants is a destabilized neighbor taken over by a insane terrorist group.

Turkey is not as secular as you might think, and Erdogan is anything but. Turkey probably couldn't afford to openly support Da'esh, but letting them wipe out the Kurds would be an expedient move on their part. Later, they can whip out their own Islamists (oh, excuse me, the "moderate opposition") to control Syria by proxy once the dust settles (Al-Nusra front, anyone?) while continuing to tacitly support the existence of Da'esh.

[Sasha]

Article with lots of proof of the cooporation between Daesh and the turkish state; https://undercoverinfo.wordpress.com/2015/11/20/isis-survives-largely-because-turkey-allows-it-to-the-evidence/

[Бай Ганьо]

This article is also enlightening: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/18/turkey-cut-islamic-state-supply-lines-erdogan-isis?CMP=share_btn_fb

[Aslan]

Mother of god..Its worse than I would've though.

But my question is, is Turkey still supplying terrorist cliches with weapons capable of fighting the Kurds? And who are these specific gulf sheikhs and Turkish military personnel who have helped these terrorists?

[Sasha]

lifted from a facebook post (no one i know);


"this is mostly acrobatics for Erdogan to try to save some face. The Syrian army troops and national defence have in the last few days captured all major mountain tops and hills in the Latakia mountains, including a very important border mountain overseeing the rebels supply lines from Turkey, meaning the battle for the coastal mountains (the most complex among all fronts) is more than 50% over. The eastern edge of the mountains oversees the Orontes valley all the way to Jisr-al-shigour (western edge of the Idelb province, captured by the Turkish sponsored Conquest army a few months ago) meaning all of that area will be open now to be retaken. On top, the border areas being fought over in the last few days are manned by groups of Turkmen villagers (they are actually called the Turkmen mountains) which are under full control of the Turkish intelligence as their most direct tool in the Syrian conflict. These groups were supposed to be a "red line" for Turkey but Russia seems intent on wiping them out.

This incident will only result in Russia's intensifying its presence and support to the Syrian regime. They are already equipping two new air bases, one near Homs and one near Aleppo (bringing the total to 3 including the Latakia base they have been operating from) and dispatching all kinds of gadgets and high tech military technology which neither Turkey nor Saudi Arabia can match. For example the first batch of T-90 tanks (20 of them) have been spotted near the Aleppo airbase. These (unlike the T-72 and older model the regime uses) have infrared interference systems that are capable of blinding anti-tank guided missles like the TOW (most important rebel strategic weapon, recked so many regime tanks and decided battles).

We may see more planes downed, Saudi has purchased Sam-3 rockets for the rebels and other shorter range shoulder carried rockets (like Stinger and Strela, can hit helicopters), but this does not fundamentally change anything. Russia has the upper hand and the morale of the government troops is quite high now, and though the rebels (from all colorings) are fighting back viciously, their fate is sealed nonetheless as they are losing ground daily (they lost a vast area south of Aleppo, all the way to the Damascus-Aleppo motorway, bringing regime troops to the border of the Idelb from the east sdie). They have to sign off their surrender sooner or later, it just a question of how big it will be -or how much the regime troops can actually advance- which will shape the final settlement."

[Sibotic]

This also seems like it could be an issue for Russia, however, who are still apparently engaged in fights elsewhere. They probably did not want to get into a confrontation with Turkey here, who are still pretty much free to fight any such pressure off so far as we've been told. This probably means that it was, as it were, highly secure for Turkey to do so, more or less.

[human strike]

I don't think this is a big deal. Russian planes violate NATO airspace all the time, including repeatedly in Turkey recently. It was only a matter of time before something like this happened, but nobody wants it to blow up into anything. As long as Putin can save face for the media at home - and judging by the US response so far, he shouldn't have trouble doing that - things will calm down and the Russians will probably behave themselves a bit more, which could be good for Turkey if it acts as a small obstacle to Russia's operations in Syria. It's just another episode in the worsening relations between Turkey and Russia (they have a lot to bicker over, as it is). Maybe Russia will offer some kind of minor assistance to the Kurds next, just to piss off Erdogan.

[Rugged Collectivist]

If Turkey's main priority is preventing the creation of an independent Kurdish state, wouldn't it be better to back Assad and the Russians than Daesh? I doubt Assad is comfortable with Kurdish independence, and if I understand the situation correctly, the governments of Europe (or at least France) are less hostile to his regime in light of the Paris attacks. Why would Erdogan risk alienating his NATO allies, not to mention Assad, the Russians, and the Iranians by aligning himself with such a universally hated faction (Daesh)?

[Sasha]

If Turkey's main priority is preventing the creation of an independent Kurdish state, wouldn't it be better to back Assad and the Russians than Daesh? I doubt Assad is comfortable with Kurdish independence, and if I understand the situation correctly, the governments of Europe (or at least France) are less hostile to his regime in light of the Paris attacks. Why would Erdogan risk alienating his NATO allies, not to mention Assad, the Russians, and the Iranians by aligning himself with such a universally hated faction (Daesh)?

Assad is Alawi, a shiite minority and there for in Iranian camp, Erdoghan is sunni and therefor close to the jihadi opposition, remember that erdoghan wants a new caliphate too, just a more practical capitalist one in the form of a new Ottaman empire, this is why he is hated by the secular opposition not because of his religion but because he is islamist first, not turkish nationalist.

And in regards too the relationship between Assad and the kurds, until the 90s assad was a welcome host to the pkk, obviously kurds where discriminated against but also left more alone than in turkey, iraq and iran. Assad trusts he can come to an federational agreement with the kurds.

[John Nada]

The Turkish province the Russian plane allegedly strayed into is disputed territory. Hatay province was originally part of French Syria, called Sanjak of Alexandretta. However Mustafa Kemal Ataturk claimed that it was part of the Turkish homeland since 4000 years ago, even though Turks are a minority in Hatay and this is 3000 years before Turks even came to Anatolia. France agreed to give Hatay to Turkey before WWII to prevent Turkey from siding with Nazi Germany. In 1938 Turkey pulled a Crimea in Hatay, sending troops to occupy it and rigged an election in favor of an independent state that quickly joined Turkey. This technically violated France treaty granting Syria independence in 1936. To this day in Syria the maps still include Hatay within Syria's borders, though some of the Turkish-backed rebels put up the more internationally recognized borders in images of Syria.

[Burzhuin]

Turkey most certainly does not want ISIL militants in their borders or even near them. Turkey is a secular (debatable but true to an extent). The late thing Turkey wants is a destabilized neighbor taken over by a insane terrorist group.

edit: After thinking a little bit I think Sasha is saying the truth. Turkey is intentionally trying to put an illegitimate government in Syria in order to serve it's own geopolitical interests. This is really turning into a proxy war
If Turkey wants all that, then why they are attacking and bombing Kurds, the only other, than Syrian Army and Russians, force who REALLY fights ISIS.

[Sasha]

remember all those "local" rebel commanders in Donbass that turned out to be Russian citizens and "former" Russian regime employees? Turkey is playing that game too;
http://www.kurdishinfo.com/turkmen-commander-turns-out-to-be-turkish-nationalist

[Guardia Rossa]

If Turkey wants all that, then why they are attacking and bombing Kurds, the only other, than Syrian Army and Russians, force who REALLY fights ISIS.

Regardless of fighting ISIS or not, they would attempt to f*ck Kurds.

While Daesh claims to "All the islamic territories in the world blablabla" is a fantasious claim, Kurdish claims to a big chump of eastern Turkey, wich is Kurdish-speaking, is as real as a claim can be.

Now, a possibly socialist, militarily experienced, internationally recognized and supported Kurdish state, is the worse thing that can border you, much worse than a group of lunatic fascists that can't even defeat ten thousand soldiers in a city...

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Erdogan hasn't done something 'stupid'. His move is entirely expected. The reason that ISIS still exists as an active military force in Syria is because Turkey at the very least turns a blind eye to their border crossings and weapons smuggling, and at most could potentially be an active participant in ISIS funding, training, and weapons distribution, as well as the Turkish state taking actions that hurt one of ISIS' main military enemies, the YPG.

Russia escalating its bombing in Syria against ISIS has led to a backlash - it appears that ISIS or groups sympathetic to it were responsible for downing the Russian passenger jet, and now we see Turkey playing the role of ISIS' ally by attacking Russia itself.

This has hallmarks of war that come dangerously close to re-producing the alliances, nationalism, and militarism of world war 1. All that is missing is the introduction of imperialism and you have the perfect storm: Turkey and ISIS in one corner, Assad and Russia in the other corner, and a third group loosely made up of the Kurds in Rojava and the rest of NATO. It's awkward and dangerous.

[Emmett Till]

Turkey most certainly does not want ISIL militants in their borders or even near them. Turkey is a secular (debatable but true to an extent). The late thing Turkey wants is a destabilized neighbor taken over by a insane terrorist group.

edit: After thinking a little bit I think Sasha is saying the truth. Turkey is intentionally trying to put an illegitimate government in Syria in order to serve it's own geopolitical interests. This is really turning into a proxy war

Turkey secular? Well, not if Erdogan has anything to say about it. He was elected in the first place to desecularize Turkey.

And that Turkey has more or less been backing ISIS is not exactly a secret. Turkey is just about the only country in the area I can think of that ISIS hasn't been calling for terrorist attacks against. Turkey had the last Caliphate after all. Hey, ISIS is even committing terrorist attacks against Saudi Arabia!

Granted, the terrorist attack against Kurds and leftists in Istanbul last month was probably ISIS, but nobody is quite sure whether or not Erdogan had a hand in it too.

[Kostador]

Everything was going well for Turkey, buying super cheap petrol from the jihadists while pretending to fight them. Profits were so big that even one of Erdogan's sons created a petrol company. Two months ago, Turkey even proposed to establish a no-fly zone 90km in Syria forbidden for Syrian aviation. And just at that moment Turkey's bright future was destroyed by the sound of departing russian planes. Bombs, cruise missiles flew over Turkey from the Caspian Sea, moreover, without being detected by the turkish AAW, then strategic warfare joined. Even France admits that ISIL gets rekt.
And apparently the Turkish authorities did not fray their nerves and decided just to intimidate Russia.
You should know that the massive bombardment of the Russian Air Force over the Turkmen opposition are for one simple reason - there are the most of the caucassian mercenaries.

There probably won't be a war. Such things have happened often enough and the world already worked some kind of regular procedure for similar incidents. Since the beginning of the civil war in Syria, Turkey itself suffered losses of its aircraft downed from the Syrian air defense and that did not serve as a reason for some major conflict.

[Antiochus]

ISIS did commit terror attacks within Turkey...More than once as well.

I just don't see the big deal. Its obvious Turkey has throw in its lot with the Islamists rebels but ANY fighter/bomber jet that strays into territory is immidietly shot down by the state whose territory has been violated (if their air defenses are solvent).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2012_interception_of_Turkish_aircraft

This is just standard modus operandi.

[Sasha]

Russian milltary aircraft invade dutch airspace all the time, dutch f-16 just escort them back over the border, they dont shoot them down.

[PhoenixAsh]

This is not standard procedure as Sasha already indicated. This is however a procedure that comes after several warnings when countries are on the verge of open hostilities. As was the case with Turkey and Syria in your link.

[Бай Ганьо]

Russian milltary aircraft invade dutch airspace all the time, dutch f-16 just escort them back over the border, they dont shoot them down.

Since March 2014, only one Russian aircraft entered Dutch airspace before being intercepted. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/full-list-of-incidents-involving-russian-military-and-nato-since-march-2014-9851309.html

And yeah, escorting back to the border is the standard procedure.

[Sasha]

Since March 2014, only one Russian aircraft entered Dutch airspace before being intercepted. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/full-list-of-incidents-involving-russian-military-and-nato-since-march-2014-9851309.html

And yeah, escorting back to the border is the standard procedure.

That article is from november 2014, since then it has happend a lot more times.

[Бай Ганьо]

That article is from november 2014, since then it has happend a lot more times.

What's your source? The website of the Ministry of Defence only mentions one more time in December 2014.

[PhoenixAsh]

It happened in april, august and again in November in 2014. After that....I don't know.

[Sasha]

numbers only up to the end of 2014; https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quick_Reaction_Alert
obviously most times we take them over from the danish or gemans who already scrambled when they fly into their airspace.
but this is all wildly off topic, i just made the point its not standard procedure to shoot at any aircraft invading your airspace even if they dont make themselves known when requested or listen to your directions, even in a situation as on the turkish border.
the only possibility they shot down that russian jet unplanned is if they thought is was syrian and they had standing policy to down all syrian planes

[Aslan]

According to Wikipedia:
''On 24 November 2015, a Turkmen rebel group under the command of Alparslan Çelik, a Turkish citizen and Grey Wolves member, shot the two pilots descending by parachutes from the Russian Sukhoi Su-24M that was shot down by Turkish F-16s near the Syria–Turkey border. In the result, one pilot, Lt. Col. Oleg Anatolyevich Peshkov, was shot dead, while the other pilot was rescued by Syrian Army commandos.''

I had previously thought that the Grey Wolves were involved in the 2015 Ankara bombing. But apparently the commander of the Turkmen who shot down the Russian jet was in fact a member of the Neo-fascist organization.

[ckaihatsu]

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/26/news/turkey-russia-economy-trade-sanctions/


4 reasons Russia and Turkey can't afford a trade war

By Ivana Kottasova @ivanakottasova

Turkey will not apologize for downing Russian jet

A war of words has erupted after Turkey shot down a Russian warplane on Tuesday.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called the downing of the jet a "stab in the back by the terrorists' accomplices." His Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Moscow of deceit, and described Putin's comments as a "huge mistake" in an interview with CNN on Thursday.

Russian officials are drawing up possible retaliatory economic sanctions against Turkey. But a trade war would cost both sides dearly. Here's why:

1. Russia has few friends

Russia doesn't have many business friends on the international scene. Turkey was one of the few partners it could rely on.

Turkey did not join Europe, the United States and other Western countries in imposing economic sanctions on Russia over its role in the crisis in Ukraine. The NATO country was actually planning to boost the volume of trade with Russia threefold to $100 billion by 2020.

Escalating tension between the two countries could severely damage that relationship.

Russia said Thursday it was tightening controls on food and agricultural imports from Turkey. And the state consumer protection agency said it had concerns about the quality and safety of clothing, furniture and cleaning products originating in Turkey.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/151126120046-putin-erdogan-780x439.jpg

Friends no more? Putin and Erdogan discussed their countries' relationship at a G20 summit last week.

2. A strategic energy link

The two countries signed a series of strategically important energy deals just a year ago. Chief among them was the Turkish Stream project -- a plan to build a new pipeline to carry Russian gas to Turkey, and then to the huge European market. It is set to replace the South Stream project, which was supposed to run through Ukraine but was canceled last year.

Turkey is the second largest buyer of Russia's natural gas, behind Germany.

Russia is also building Turkey's first nuclear power station, located in Mersin on the south coast of the country. Construction started in April and is expected to be completed by 2020. Under the agreement, signed in 2010, Russia will finance the $22 billion project and then operate the plant.

Both projects could be subject to sanctions, Russian economy minister Alexey Ulyukaev said Thursday.

Related: Turkey's election rally could be short-lived

3. Tourist traffic

Russian visitors are crucial for the tourism industry in Turkey.

Around 4.5 million Russians visited the country in 2014, and official Turkish data show that more than 12% of all visitors were Russian, making them the second biggest group after Germans.

Putin has advised Russians not to visit Turkey in the aftermath of the downing of the plane, and Russia's Federal Agency for Tourism told travel agents to stop selling tours to the country.

And with Egypt out of bounds after a Russian airliner was blown up shortly after taking off from the resort of Sharm el Sheikh last month, Turkey may have won even more tourist business. That appears less likely now.

4. Both need all the help they can get

Both countries are already suffering huge economic turmoil and urgently need a boost, not another shock.
Russia's economy has been slammed by low oil prices and Western sanctions. The International Monetary Fund expects Russian GDP will shrink by 3.8% this year, and by another 0.6% in 2016.

Turkey is not in the best place either. Months of political deadlock after an inconclusive election in June weighed on activity. Growth has slumped in recent years. The IMF expects the economy to grow by just 3.1% this year and 3.6% in 2016 -- way below the 9% it experienced in 2010 and 2011.

The lira has fallen by about 20% against the dollar this year. That's making it more expensive for Turkey to service $125 billion in short term foreign debt.

Related: Markets dip after Turkey shoots down Russian warplane
CNNMoney (London) November 26, 2015: 12:57 PM ET

[Бай Ганьо]

I wouldn't be surprised if Gazprom were to announce the cancellation of gas deals with Turkey soon.

Dont know how dependent the turks are on russian gas but last thing russia would want is start an trade war with turkey, do not forget that turkey controlls the bosporus strait which would leave russia essentially landlocked for most of the year (only the black sea harbours and the kalinka enclave and the harbour on the other end of siberia near japan remain ice free). If russia wants to hurt turkey their best bet is is deciding the syrian war quickly in favour of the Assad regime. Whether they can force an desicive victory without boots on the ground is a big question though.

Apparently, Russia has frozen (but not cancelled) a pipeline project. https://www.rt.com/business/324230-gazprom-turkish-stream-cancellation/

Another interesting article:


Erdogan Blackmails NATO Allies
by MIKE WHITNEY

You know the country has really gone to the dogs when Washington’s main allies in its war on Syria are the two biggest terrorist incubators on the planet. I’m talking about Saudi Arabia and Turkey, both of which are run by fanatical Islamic zealots devoted to spreading violent jihad to the four corners of the earth. Not that the US doesn’t have blood on its hands too. It does, but that’s beside the point.

The point is that if you’re trying to sell your fake war on terror to the public, then you might want to think twice about lining up with Grand Sultan Erdogan and King Chop-Chop of Riyadh. The optics alone should have sent the White House PR team running for cover. I mean, couldn’t they have hired squeaky-clean Iceland to join the fray just to persuade the public that the ongoing proxy war wasn’t a complete sham. Which it is.

It all goes to show that no one in the administration really gives a rip about appearances anymore. Obama is going to do what he wants to do, and if you don’t like it: Tough!

Isn’t that the message?

Of course it is. But just look how that apathy transfers itself into other areas of governing like, let’s say, strategic planning. Take Syria for example, where the think tank pundits were given the task of coming up with a plan to topple a secular regime without: 1–triggering a violent insurgency. 2–igniting massive antiwar demonstrations around the world and, 3—producing hundreds or thousands of US casualties. In other words, our esteemed leaders didn’t want another Iraq which is understandable.

Anyway, that was the basic assignment. So the think tankers came up with this brilliant plan to enlist Sunni militants that the CIA would fund, arm, train and deploy into Syria to shoot the place up, raise holy hell, and then topple the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad. That was the plan, at least.

Four and half years later, the place is a worse mess than Iraq. Half the population is either dead or internally displaced, the civilian infrastructure is a shambles, and nothing has been achieved. Nothing. Assad is safely tucked away in Damascus, the jihadi proxies are on the run, and everyone hates the US more than ever.

Great plan, eh? Where’s the downside?

The downside is that now Washington finds itself backed against the wall with precious few options that don’t involve a direct confrontation with Moscow. Of course, all of this could have been avoided had the White House been more eager to negotiate a settlement to the conflict months earlier in Vienna. But, instead, the bullheaded Obama team decided to stick with its dreary “Assad must go” mantra which put the kibosh on any long-term agreement or ceasefire proposal. So now, the Russian-led coalition has made significant gains on the ground, retaking numerous key cities, highways and airbases in the west and south while sending US-backed terrorists fleeing eastward towards Raqqa. These developments have forced Washington into a fallback position that will likely entail air-support for Turkish ground forces who will be deployed to Northern Syria to take and hold area sufficient for a “safe zone”, which is an innocuous sounding moniker the media invokes to conceal the fact that Turkey plans to annex sovereign Syrian territory which, by the way, is an act of war.

Now fast-forward to last week:

Some readers may have noticed disturbing headlines like this in the Wall Street Journal: “U.S. Urges Turkey to Seal Border”

Or this Reuters piece that popped up on Monday: “NATO allies act to strengthen Turkey’s air defenses”

Why, you may ask, does Obama want Turkey to close the border now when the horse has already left the barn? What I mean is that the White House has known for over 3 years that the bulk of the jihadis were transiting Turkey on their way to Syria, just like they knew that ISIS’s oil was being transported across Turkey. They knew it all because they have their damn spy satellites and AWACs circling overhead. In fact, they could probably tell you how many bumblebees crossed the border at any given time, so they sure as heck saw the throngs of bearded roughnecks moving southward in droves. So why is it so urgent to close the border now, after all, the damage is already done, right?

Could it have something to do with the fact that Putin’s legions are moving north to seal the border? Could there be an alternate objective, for example, could the US and Turkey be setting the stage for an incursion into Syria that would secure the land needed for the glorious safe zone?

That’s what most of the analysts seem to think, at least the ones that haven’t been coopted by the mainstream media. But why is NATO suddenly getting involved? What’s that all about? After all, Putin was reluctant to even commit his airforce to the Syrian conflict. It’s not like he’s planning to invade Turkey or something, right?

Of course he’s not thinking of invading Turkey. That would pit Russia against NATO in a planet-incinerating fight-to-the-death. That might please some of the crackpots in Washington, but just about everyone else would rather avoid the mushroom cloud scenario.

So, what’s really going on?

For that, we turn to Moon of Alabama that provides this excellent summary in a recent post titled: “The Real “Terrorist Sympathizers” Want To Wage War On Syria … And Russia”. Here’s an excerpt:

“Who initiated this sudden rush within major NATO governments to get parliamentary blank checks for waging a long war on Syria? Not only in the UK but also in France and Germany?

The German government turned on a dime from “no military intervention in Syria ever” to “lets wage a war of terror on Syria” without any backing from the UN or international law. .. Who initiated this? A simple, medium size terror attack in Paris by some Belgians and French can not be the sole reason for this stampede.

Did Obama call and demand support for his plans? What are these?

I smell that a trap is being laid, likely via a treacherous Turkey, to somehow threaten Russia with, or involve it in, a wider war. This would include military attacks in east-Ukraine or Crimea as well as in Syria. Obama demanded European backing in case the issue gets out of hand. No other reason I have found explains the current panic. The terrorists the “west” supports in Syria are in trouble. The real terrorist sympathizers need to rush to their help. It is a start of all-out war on Syria and its Russian protectors.” (“Terrorist Sympathizers” Want To Wage War On Syria … And Russia“, Moon of Alabama)

Is that what’s going on? Has Turkish President Erdogan figured out how to hoodwink the NATO allies into a confrontation with Russia that will help him achieve his goal of toppling Assad and stealing Syrian territory?

It’s hard to say, but clearly something has changed, after all, neither France, nor Germany nor the UK were nearly as gung-ho just a few weeks ago. Now they’re all hyped-up and ready for WW3. Why is that?

Ahh, Grasshopper, that is the mystery, a mystery that was unraveled in an op-ed that appeared in the Tuesday edition of the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily News. Here’s the excerpt:

“The increase in military cooperation within NATO countries against ISIL and the piling up of NATO forces near Turkey’s border with Syria take place in parallel with the recent deal between Ankara and the Brussels over Syrian refugees and the re-activation of Turkey’s EU accession bid.” ….(“Western forces pile up on Turkey-Syria border“, Hurriyet)

Okay, so Erdogan worked out a deal with the other NATO countries. Why is that such a big deal?

Well, check out this blurb from the Today’s Zaman: “Erdogan’s advisor, Burhan Kuzu, summed it up even more succinctly saying: “The EU finally got Turkey’s message and opened its purse strings. What did we say? ‘We’ll open our borders and unleash all the Syrian refugees on you,’” Kuzu stated in his controversial tweet… ” (“EU bows to Turkey’s threat on refugees says Erdoğan advisor“, Today’s Zaman)

Blackmail? Is that what we’re talking about, blackmail?

It sure sounds like it.

Let’s summarize: Erdogan intentionally releases tens of thousands of Syrian refugees into Europe to put pressure on EU politicians who quickly lose the support of their people and face the meteoric rise of right wing parties. And then, the next thing you know, Merkel, Hollande and every other EU leader is looking to cut a deal with Erdogan to keep the refugees in Turkey.

Isn’t that how it all went down? Except we’re missing one important factoid here, because according to the first op-ed “The increase in military cooperation within NATO… and the piling up of NATO forces near Turkey’s border”…took place in parallel with the deal between Ankara and the Brussels.”

Get it? So there was a quid pro quo that no one wants to talk about. In other words, Germany, France and the UK agreed to support Erdogan’s loony plan to conduct military operations in Syria, risking a serious dust-up with Russia, in order to save their own miserable political careers.

Boy, if that doesn’t take the cake, than I don’t know what does.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/12/03/erdogan-blackmails-nato-allies/

[Hexen]

Apparently, Russia has frozen (but not cancelled) a pipeline project. https://www.rt.com/business/324230-gazprom-turkish-stream-cancellation/

Another interesting article:

Well first of all the former is Russia's Fox News and the latter is a conspiracy mongering site dressed up as 'leftist' due to the WW3 hype apparent there which is popular among conspiracy nuts since it links to their main basis (biblical prophecies).

[Бай Ганьо]

Well first of all the former is Russia's Fox News and the latter is a conspiracy mongering site dressed up as 'leftist' due to the WW3 hype apparent there which is popular among conspiracy nuts since it links to their main basis (biblical prophecies).

Oh right, so everything they publish must be nonsense. :rolleyes:

[Hexen]

Oh right, so everything they publish must be nonsense. :rolleyes:

All I'm saying is you must take everything from a grain of salt when it comes to sources you know especially the ideological basis that they're run by.

[Emmett Till]

Well first of all the former is Russia's Fox News and the latter is a conspiracy mongering site dressed up as 'leftist' due to the WW3 hype apparent there which is popular among conspiracy nuts since it links to their main basis (biblical prophecies).

Russia's Fox News? Well, maybe so, but if Fox News reported the cancelling of an American pipeline project there would be no reason to think they were making it up.

As for the "South Shall Rise Again" religious nutcases, even a stopped clock can be right once a day.

Their notion that Erdogan is blackmailing the Europeans with Syrian refugees is so inherently plausible that I suspect they have that one right.

But guess what, that kind of blackmail doesn't work on America, the right wing backlash since Paris means that there won't be any Syria refugees allowed into America.

And sure enough, whereas the Europeans may be playing the hate Russia card, we now have a turnabout, and suddenly the American press is more favorable to Putin after Paris. and so is the Obama administration. (The Republicans and Hillary with their Syrian no fly zone for the benefit of ISIS are a comedy act, which Hillary I am sure realises but the Republican clowns may not.) If you really want to go after ISIS, and America does, then some sort of deal with Putin is necessary.

[ckaihatsu]

[E]rdogan is blackmailing the Europeans with Syrian refugees


The reason why this kind of formulation can *correctly* be termed a 'conspiracy theory' is because it doesn't *logistically* hold-up....

True to its definition, it confers more 'power' / 'authority' / determination to the relatively subjective parties (nations) involved than is *objectively* possible....

The Syrian refugees, like *all* refugees, are going to want to head for the most economically developed countries, like those in Europe, and the U.S. -- whereas the affected countries like Turkey and those of the EU, regardless of *intent*, are not going to be able to *redirect* and *corral* refugees according to some kind of master conspired plan.

In other words this is a case of purported, projected 'micromanagement' onto those countries that clearly have less and less geopolitical leverage in the transpiring situation (Syrian refugees), which is 'blowback' from those same countries' recent prior actions, namely supporting ISIS against the cohesion of the Syrian state.

[Comrade Jacob]

He won't even apologise the absolute mad-man. They violate air-space all the time (thousands a year in Greece). Hundreds of nations have violated theirs this year and they somehow chose to shoot down a Russian jet? Clearly protecting the Da'esh area inbetween the Kurdish areas for their oil trade.

[Бай Ганьо]

An analysis by The Saker: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/week-nine-of-the-russian-intervention-in-syria-the-empire-strikes-back/

[ckaihatsu]

An analysis by The Saker: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/week-nine-of-the-russian-intervention-in-syria-the-empire-strikes-back/


The following is the real crux of the matter -- if the Western powers really are serious about curtailing ISIS then the first step would be the one that's most available to them, a geopolitical one, namely dealing with Turkey's position:





[I]t has now become undeniable that Turkey is not only an ally, but a patron and sponsor of Daesh.

[Devrim]

The Syrian refugees, like *all* refugees, are going to want to head for the most economically developed countries, like those in Europe, and the U.S.

This is completely untrue. 95% of the world's refugees are in countries bordering their own. 95% of Syrian refugees are in neighbouring countries. Turkey has over two million refugees. Gaziantepe, a small city in Turkey that I presume you have not heard of, has more refugees than all of Europe.

Devrim

[Sasha]

This is completely untrue. 95% of the world's refugees are in countries bordering their own. 95% of Syrian refugees are in neighbouring countries. Turkey has over two million refugees. Gaziantepe, a small city in Turkey that I presume you have not heard of, has more refugees than all of Europe.

Devrim


yup, and lebanon 1 in 4 people is a syrian refugee now, what makes most people move on to Europe is the realization that they have nothing to return too in the foreseeable future, that they seek dignified education and livelihood for themselves and their family.
(of which one of the reasons is that refugees in turkey are not able to work legally or study because Turkey didnt sign the refugee manifest)

if your house burned down you wait in a nearby hostel until the insurance comes through and you can rebuild, if the city was leveled by a nuclear accident you get the fuck out of the state.

it says a lot about the horror of the situation in Syria and how many Syrians view the future of the country that they move outside the region in these numbers (even when most, for now, stay), Palestinians but even Iraqi's never did this in these percentages for example.

[Devrim]

But the percentage is still low. It's just that the overall number is massive. Refugees are certainly allowed to work legally in Turkey, at least in some sectors.

To be honest with those who move are not the poorest of the refugees. They are the ones who hav money. The people smugglers taking them across the Agean on those dangerous boats are charging obscene amounts of money. Most of them don't have it.

Devrim

[Aslan]

Jordan has 1/4th of it's population as refugees. Also another thing apperantly the amount of children people have in Iraq and Syria has been dropping since the 80s. And now that all this shit has happened, it'll probably drop even faster.

Take that Eurabia screaming fascists!

[Emmett Till]

The reason why this kind of formulation can *correctly* be termed a 'conspiracy theory' is because it doesn't *logistically* hold-up....

True to its definition, it confers more 'power' / 'authority' / determination to the relatively subjective parties (nations) involved than is *objectively* possible....

The Syrian refugees, like *all* refugees, are going to want to head for the most economically developed countries, like those in Europe, and the U.S. -- whereas the affected countries like Turkey and those of the EU, regardless of *intent*, are not going to be able to *redirect* and *corral* refugees according to some kind of master conspired plan.

In other words this is a case of purported, projected 'micromanagement' onto those countries that clearly have less and less geopolitical leverage in the transpiring situation (Syrian refugees), which is 'blowback' from those same countries' recent prior actions, namely supporting ISIS against the cohesion of the Syrian state.

Wrong. Turkey has quite strong border controls, unlike for example Greece.

So yes, it is not difficult for Erdogan to turn the tap on and off for refugees escaping Turkey for Greece, the next stop to Europe. Indeed, if Turkey wanted to *facilitate* refugees escaping for Europe, nothing would be easier than just having the Turkish navy escort them by the hundred thousands onto Greek islands, or just filling up the trains from Istanbul to Thessalonica.

Granted, they can't micromanage the flow precisely, many refugees and paid smugglers can find ways of getting around Turkish border controls. But given that we have hundreds of thousands of human beings involved, if let us say Erdogan ends up off by ten or twenty thousand as to how many refugees he wants to deluge the EU with, no big deal.

[Emmett Till]

The following is the real crux of the matter -- if the Western powers really are serious about curtailing ISIS then the first step would be the one that's most available to them, a geopolitical one, namely dealing with Turkey's position:

The Saker is a right wing whacko.

The "West" is in a cleft stick over Turkey. Yes, the "West" at this point, whatever the powers may have felt 4-5 years ago, has noticed that the Frankenstein monster has turned on its creator, and would definitely like to put an end to ISIS. But pushing Turkey around is a big problem. Turkey is a very important country, economically, politically and militarily, so Obama and the rest of the "Western" Too Live Crew are kinda stuck.

Bad news for the imperialists, ultimately good news for the people of the world.

[A.J.]

As for the "South Shall Rise Again" religious nutcases, even a stopped clock can be right once a day.

Their notion that Erdogan is blackmailing the Europeans with Syrian refugees is so inherently plausible that I suspect they have that one right.



Or twice a day if it's using 12 hour time.

[ckaihatsu]

The Saker is a right wing whacko.




The "West" is in a cleft stick over Turkey. Yes, the "West" at this point, whatever the powers may have felt 4-5 years ago, has noticed that the Frankenstein monster has turned on its creator, and would definitely like to put an end to ISIS. But pushing Turkey around is a big problem. Turkey is a very important country, economically, politically and militarily, so Obama and the rest of the "Western" Too Live Crew are kinda stuck.

Bad news for the imperialists, ultimately good news for the people of the world.


Well, then, this is your *line* on the situation, and it *sucks* -- you're saying that Turkey will just remain unchanged, which implies that it'll continue to funnel arms to ISIS, so that ISIS can continue to carry out acts of violence, as it's already proven to do.

Worse, you're also saying that any strikes against the Western powers / imperialists are *unreservedly* good -- I'll simply juxtapose *my* line here, from that other thread:





[A]ny blows against the empire by ISIS will not be 'free'. The Islamic State will claim ground of their own from whatever efforts of theirs are successful, and they'd have no problem subjugating people to their belief system.

[Emmett Till]

Well, then, this is your *line* on the situation, and it *sucks* -- you're saying that Turkey will just remain unchanged, which implies that it'll continue to funnel arms to ISIS, so that ISIS can continue to carry out acts of violence, as it's already proven to do.

Worse, you're also saying that any strikes against the Western powers / imperialists are *unreservedly* good -- I'll simply juxtapose *my* line here, from that other thread:

Turkey will remain unchanged, until the working people of Turkey overthrow Erdogan in particular and capitalism in general. But that would require revolution, something you have lost interest in, rather you want to play the "geopolitics" game and defend Western Civilization against Muslim barbarians. Why you are still here on Revleft I do not understand, surely there are larger Internet ponds to play in for folks who believe as you do.

Strikes against the *people* who live in "the West," terrorism against civilians, is unreservedly bad. Strikes against the military forces of the imperialist ruling classes by people, whatever their politics, who are oppressed by imperialism and capitalism and wish to strike out against the oppressors are unreservedly good. That is ABC, anyone who doesn't understand that really doesn't belong here.

[ckaihatsu]

Turkey will remain unchanged,


No, not necessarily -- you're implying that I'm being naive for thinking that a multipolar roundtable will accomplish anything, while I'm maintaining that it's either geopolitical cooperation, or world war (and I favor cooperation).





until the working people of Turkey overthrow Erdogan in particular and capitalism in general.


No political differences here.





But that would require revolution, something you have lost interest in, rather you want to play the "geopolitics" game and defend Western Civilization against Muslim barbarians.


This is downright insulting, and you're continuing to impute characteristics onto my politics that simply don't exist. It's really a *pattern* with you, that you're just making accusations, to see what 'sticks' and what doesn't.





Why you are still here on Revleft I do not understand, surely there are larger Internet ponds to play in for folks who believe as you do.




Strikes against the *people* who live in "the West," terrorism against civilians, is unreservedly bad.


See, this is as far as the radical position can go -- to do some perfunctory hand-wringing about ISIS' attacks, and then to ignore any implications for the future regarding the perpetrators.





Strikes against the military forces of the imperialist ruling classes by people, whatever their politics, who are oppressed by imperialism and capitalism and wish to strike out against the oppressors are unreservedly good.


So after bemoaning the strikes against the people of the West, you're then saying that ISIS attacks against the *military* of the West is *good*.

But, guess, what -- ? ISIS *isn't* attacking the *military* of the West, it's attacking *regular people*, or 'civilians'.

Are you *applauding* these particular violent tactics, as being 'good', and somehow even 'anti-imperialist' -- ?

(Or can you wake-up and see that it's really *opportunistic terrorism* and fiercely sectarian politics at work -- ??)





That is ABC, anyone who doesn't understand that really doesn't belong here.

[Emmett Till]

No, not necessarily -- you're implying that I'm being naive for thinking that a multipolar roundtable will accomplish anything, while I'm maintaining that it's either geopolitical cooperation, or world war (and I favor cooperation).

So then, bombing by Russia and bombing by Turkey and barrel bombing by Assad and bombing by US, France, England and Germany should be coordinated, instead of them bombing each other's proxies?

Well, that's possible, they could all just agree to bomb the civilian population, which all of them including Russia are already doing. I am not in favor.


...See, this is as far as the radical position can go -- to do some perfunctory hand-wringing about ISIS' attacks, and then to ignore any implications for the future regarding the perpetrators.

And you want all the major perpetrators to get together against ISIS, the minor perpetrator.


So after bemoaning the strikes against the people of the West, you're then saying that ISIS attacks against the *military* of the West is *good*.

But, guess, what -- ? ISIS *isn't* attacking the *military* of the West, it's attacking *regular people*, or 'civilians'.

Are you *applauding* these particular violent tactics, as being 'good', and somehow even 'anti-imperialist' -- ?

(Or can you wake-up and see that it's really *opportunistic terrorism* and fiercely sectarian politics at work -- ??)

Well, the Obama strategy, unlike the Bush strategy, is to do the dirty work through local proxies and drone strikes and bombs, not with "boots on the ground." Though that is fraying, as it ain't working...

The crimes of ISIS don't just pale before the crimes of US imperialism, they also for that matter pale before the crimes of the Assad regime. And the Shi'ite sectarian rulers of Iraq and their Kurdish allies may not have killed quite as many Sunnis as ISIS has non-Sunnis, yet at least, but not for lack of trying.

No, not even here on Revleft is anyone likely to "support" the "tactics" of ISIS, I should hope. But that's not the issue. The issue is whether one supports the imperialist assault on the peoples of Iraq and Syria, currently disguised as a "war against ISIS."

By the way, just saw the Republican debate last night. Your position would have fitted in quite well, somewhere in between Rand and Trump. Fairly close to that of Jeb Bush.

[ckaihatsu]

So then, bombing by Russia and bombing by Turkey and barrel bombing by Assad and bombing by US, France, England and Germany should be coordinated, instead of them bombing each other's proxies?

Well, that's possible, they could all just agree to bomb the civilian population, which all of them including Russia are already doing. I am not in favor.


I *hear* ya -- here's from our exchange at that other thread:





I *know* that bombing campaigns are ultimately ineffectual -- if you'll notice, my support is for *diplomacy*, as at posts #55, 51, and 43.




[W]e have to look at the *larger powers* here, to see how geopolitical cooperation can wall-out ISIS, from a common position of consensus. In the short term I don't think anything else will be efficacious.


---





And you want all the major perpetrators to get together against ISIS, the minor perpetrator.


Correct -- due to concerns about what civil society / domestic policy would look like, ISIS (Islamic-fundamentalist) vs. the West (secular).





Well, the Obama strategy, unlike the Bush strategy, is to do the dirty work through local proxies and drone strikes and bombs, not with "boots on the ground." Though that is fraying, as it ain't working...


Agreed, and I agree with the position from the statement that I posted to the 'France' thread:










ISIS will not be defeated by airstrikes. But the Obama administration, the Pentagon and the American public have little appetite for a full ground invasion — which would be another quagmire, result in the deaths of huge numbers of Syrians and thousands of U.S. troops, and repeat the very conditions that gave rise to ISIS in the beginning. It is clear that ISIS can only be defeated by forces on the ground who are from the region itself. But the only ground forces with the experience and capability to take them on are the Syrian Arab Army, the YPG and their allied militias. That is the central contradiction in U.S. policy, and it cannot be wiggled out of.


---





The crimes of ISIS don't just pale before the crimes of US imperialism, they also for that matter pale before the crimes of the Assad regime. And the Shi'ite sectarian rulers of Iraq and their Kurdish allies may not have killed quite as many Sunnis as ISIS has non-Sunnis, yet at least, but not for lack of trying.

No, not even here on Revleft is anyone likely to "support" the "tactics" of ISIS, I should hope. But that's not the issue. The issue is whether one supports the imperialist assault on the peoples of Iraq and Syria, currently disguised as a "war against ISIS."


Oh, okay, well I remain anti-imperialism, but in reality there's the necessity of *priorities*, as we saw when NATO / the neo-con agenda decided to intervene against Assad -- certainly no one is defending his atrocities, but it's *inappropriate* for the Western powers to just *intervene* and bomb the Syrian state, for the same reasons that the U.S. should not have invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya (etc.).





By the way, just saw the Republican debate last night. Your position would have fitted in quite well, somewhere in between Rand and Trump. Fairly close to that of Jeb Bush.


Oh, okay, well, I'm *still* not 'the bad guy', nor am I anywhere near the politics of the bourgeoisie, despite your repeated attempts to juxtapose me that way. Please recall:





I'll prefer to invoke the 'politics makes for strange bedfellows' saying on this one, because I do happen to see the elimination of ISIS as ranking *very* high right now, with the need to overthrow global imperialism right behind it.

[ckaihatsu]

http://www.legitgov.org/#breaking_news

http://russia-insider.com/en/terrorists-supply-line-about-break-washington-alarmed/ri11750


Washington Is Panicking That Putin Is Breaking the ISIS Supply Line

ISIS is intergral to the West's strategy for toppling Assad

Michael Lehner Subscribe to Michael Lehner(Neo Presse) Subscribe to Neo PresseMon, Dec 14 | 18,819 59

http://russia-insider.com/sites/insider/files/styles/s400/public/burningtruck.jpg?itok=BpVE873t
Originally Appeared at NEOPresse. Translated from the German by Susan Neumann

For years, the US-directed NATO alliance has made sure that convoys full of food, weapons, and other goods have gotten to the terrorist groups IS and al-Qaida via the Syrian-Turkish border. Russian air strikes have massively impeded this service, if not brought it to a standstill.

Russian airstrikes hit one of these convoys in the northwest Syrian town of Azaz, and the Turkish-based newspaper Daily Sabah is reporting the following:

At least seven people died, 10 got injured after an apparent airstrike, reportedly by Russian jets, targeted an aid convoy in northwestern Syrian town of Azaz near a border crossing with Turkey on Wednesday.

Strangely enough, this incident wasn’t picked up by the Western high-performance press. This is rather atypical considering both sides are currently engaged in a propaganda war. It almost seems like the USA/NATO either (a), don’t want to draw attention to the location of this remaining supply line, or (b), it’s not an aid convoy, but a supply truck for IS.

The Daily Sabah report continues:

Speaking to Daily Sabah, Serkan Nergis from the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH) said that the targeted area is located some 5 kilometers southwest of the Öncüpınar Border Crossing. Nergis said that IHH has a civil defense unit in Azaz and they helped locals to extinguish the trucks. Trucks were probably carrying aid supplies or commercial materials, Nergis added.

Regardless of what kind of goods were transported, this confirms that the terrorists in the area near the Oncupinar Border Crossing are in charge. This is where the supply line from Turkey to IS can be found. Already in November of 2014, the Oncupinar Border Crossing was mentioned in an article by Deutsche Welle (DW), that described a scene of hundreds of trucks waiting at the border to get into IS territory. Probably with Ankara’s approval. The DW article from 2014 reads as follows:

Like this article? Donate to keep us alive! (https://goo.gl/VmmitY)

Every day, trucks laden with food, clothing, and other supplies cross the border from Turkey to Syria. It is unclear who is picking up the goods. The haulers believe most of the cargo is going to the “Islamic State” militia. Oil, weapons, and soldiers are also being smuggled over the border, and Kurdish volunteers are now patrolling the area in a bid to stem the supplies.

[DW Video, Turkey: IS supply channels / Focus on Europe] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akbfplUcjLU)

Already last year one would have had to ask the legitimate question: if the plan was to destroy IS, why didn’t the US just bomb the supply route instead of leading operations inside Syria? (because it was, de facto, never the plan to destroy IS.) Especially if (a), these attacks were considered to be less dangerous and (b), logistics for the attacks were right there in the area (Turkish airbase).

Asking the more obvious questions would be enough to place a crown on the lying politics of the West:

Why weren’t these convoys stopped while they were still in Turkish territory?
Why wasn’t the driver arrested and detained in Turkey, and "the sources for these supplies" traced back to their origins?
Because they just didn’t want to?

When answering these questions, it has to be obvious to everyone – even to those who don't give it much thought – that there’s real intent behind this, and that USA/NATO purposefully provided IS with supplies. Period.

Here’s where Russia comes in. Every country that wants to fight IS will do so on the supply lines. This has been an employed military strategy for centuries. Russia’s bombing of supply trucks near the border (so that the fewest possible goods can be unloaded and redistributed through other means) is therefore logical, because if the supplies make it over one of the controlled border crossings, they will end up in the hands of terrorists (whichever target area that may be).

This development doesn’t please the strategists in Washington one bit and is probably the reason for the shoot-down of the Russian fighter jet. While Syrian and Kurdish forces control the border east of the Euphrates, the Afrin-Jarabulus corridor is the last remaining pathway for supplies to the IS. The Syrian army has also begun a campaign (starting from Aleppo) and has advanced eastwards. Eventually they will start to swing towards the Syrian-Turkish border at Jarabulus. More or less at the same time the Syrian army began their campaign, Russia began bombing in the area around Afrin, Ad Dana, and Azaz to cut off the supply route.

The interaction between Russian air raids and the Syrian army offensive on the ground have the potential to get rid of IS. This is an unparalleled nightmare for the planners in Washington. Closing this supply corridor would mean the complete defeat of the terrorists from IS, al-Nusra and Co. and it would mean the restoration of Syrian sovereignty and the government structures in this area. This could explain the sudden "activity" of the West in sending special forces to Syria, and as already mentioned, the reason for the shoot-down of the fighter jet.

In summing it all up, it also becomes evident that the Syrian "civil war" never really was one. Rather, the terrorists were supported by the West from the very beginning, for the purpose of overthrowing Assad’s government (as I’ve written in previous articles). When faced with a terrorist defeat, the sponsors will throw all their political weight behind the terrorists, no matter what it costs.

Ultimately, this is proof that the hegemonic ambitions of the US / the West in this region were the reason behind the creation of IS. It was never a fight against IS. It was the targeted, planned, intentional creation of Islamic extremism, in the form of the Islamic State.