[AgentR11]

Oh and if you think China is going to be in a mood to help the EU/US side of the argument on anything for a while....
Check this.
http://en.people.cn/n/2015/1126/c90000-8981923.html

A US judge just took a swing WAY outside his league.
Numbers are modest; but I think China just drew a line in the sand far starker than any whining about the South China Sea.

They are *not* happy with us at the moment.

Not that they'll meddle between Turkey and Russia on Russia's side either, because its Russia's issue to deal with as Russia sees fit, and they don't need help.

[AgentR11]

"China's #1 interest is in stability, they won't ever side with Russia if they know Russia's part of rocking a boat too and has equal blame.

Do you even READ what people write?

I specifically said China will NOT side with Russia over Turkey. They won't side with anyone. THAT is their agreement. Russia won't get involved in China's constant whining about Japanese apologies; even though I'm sure it drives the Russians nuts. Same deal. From Moscow's PoV, China / Japan apology chasing is completely China's issue, and China can handle it however they see fit.

[SeaGypsy]

If he does read it he ignores it, selectively. 6 has given himself the job of hawk, MIC hack, always backing the most expensive, most wasteful, most likely to drag war on as long as possible positions- ie Fiorina & Graham- the US should just invade & occupy anywhere we don't like, including both Syria & Iran, a few months ago it was Mexico. The guy has no answer to the fact of money & lives lost in Afghanistan & Iraq, essentially for nothing. His answer is more of the same. Bozo.

[Sixstrings]

If he does read it he ignores it, selectively. 6 has given himself the job of hawk, MIC hack, always backing the most expensive, most wasteful, most likely to drag war on as long as possible positions- ie Fiorina & Graham- the US should just invade & occupy anywhere we don't like, including both Syria & Iran, a few months ago it was Mexico. The guy has no answer to the fact of money & lives lost in Afghanistan & Iraq, essentially for nothing. His answer is more of the same. Bozo.

Well you know what SG, if the prime minister of australia would like to step up and be leader of the free world and the Australian military start shouldering the burden and costs of leadership -- then I can blissfully ignore global security concerns and then just focus on domestic issues.

Bottom line SG, look man, I live in the country that usually "handles things." If I moved to Canada and became Canadian then I'd have an entirely different perspective and responsibility as a voter.

But it is what it is, I'm an American voter and it's like being on a jury and there's a responsibility there to think about foreign policy when you vote.

And I don't want to have to worry about all this stuff and see it not handled right. And I won't vote for a fascist Donald Trump either, but maybe I may vote for Jeb or Rubio.

And even Hillary Clinton is a hawk.

Don't be so hard on me. Your complaints are just against the establishment, not me. I'm nothing unusual if I AM PROBABLY VOTING FOR HILLARY CLINTON. Or maybe Jeb Bush. That just makes mainstream.

[Sixstrings]

I specifically said China will NOT side with Russia over Turkey. They won't side with anyone. THAT is their agreement.

The way you say it makes China sound like more of an ally to Russia than what it likely is, like China and Russia have an agreement to stay out of each others' business.

But I'm just saying it doesn't look that way to me, on this Turkey issue China is decidedly neutral.

NATO said "we defend Turkey's right to defend itself and its airspace." And then the rest of NATO probably did a lot of talking to Turkey in private.

Whereas China says publicly, "those two countries are telling different stories and their issues go deeper than the border and they need to talk it out."

About China staying out of Russia's business, I just disagree with you Agent, China has too much to lose if Putin ever really did get to a brink of serious conflict with nato.

I think they'd only stay out of it, up to a point and if it got too serious then China would be a moderating influence on Russia.

[Cid_Yama]

Hey, 6 have another one.

'We'll drink strong ales and porters, and make the rafters roar,
and when our money is all spent, we'll go to sea once more'

[Sixstrings]

Hey, 6 have another one.

'We'll drink strong ales and porters, and make the rafters roar,
and when our money is all spent, we'll go to sea once more'

Sigh. Cheers Cid, happy "turkey day" to you, and Agent and SG.

[Plantagenet]

Hey, 6 have another one.

'We'll drink strong ales and porters, and make the rafters roar,
and when our money is all spent, we'll go to sea once more'

Sigh. Cheers Cid, happy "turkey day" to you, and Agent and SG.

Happy turkey day to 6 and to every one of his multiple debating partners.

Thanks for the insights and the laughs, guys. Have a great holiday.

Cheers!

[ROCKMAN]

Plant - I assume you remember my thoughts on the WORDS of any politician: I couldn't care less what they say...only what they do. Putin didn't say wgat he wouldn't do. But what he did was move one of deadliest anti-aircraft systems within range of Turk airspace. The Turks might have "officially" apologized'but they haven't said they wouldn't attack Russian aircraft they approached thrir border. So again: if Russian radar spots a Turk aircraft targeting a Russian aircraft is there any doubt they wouldn't launch their S-400's to protect their pilots?

And in general: does anyone here really think any NATO country would do anything more then issue a harsh VERBAL response? And does anyone really think Russia wouldn't respond militarially if any NATO country, including the US, that attacked their military assets?

IOW who considers Putin to be that willing to look impotent to yhe Russian people? Of course he woildn't since he obvious isn't driven by an obsesive ego. LOL.

IMHO it's all on the Turks now: if they just threaten a Russian aircraft let alone shoot one down I'm pretty sure Putin will feel he has no choice but attack the Turks. I would hope NATO has made clear to the Turks (unofficially of course) that NATO would not attack Russia if it attacks the Turk military. NATO 's sole leverage is the assumption it would keep its word to defend any NATO country. The first time it doesn't comply with its mandate essentially NATO ceases to exist.

[dissident]

http://sputniknews.com/military/2015112 ... -iraq.html

Several bases of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militant organization were hit during air raids by Turkish air forces in Iraqi Kurdistan, local news outlet Rudaw reported on Wednesday.

Erdo-turd-land routinely violates the air space of Syria and Iraq, as well as Greece and Armenia. Time to feed Erdo-turd-land its own medicine.

[SeaGypsy]

Where in NATOs mandate is it OK to sponsor terrorist armies?

[ROCKMAN]

Gypsy - As has been said many times before: one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. But as I said earlier: such statements are just WORDS. And one finds out very quickly words don't mean sh@t when domeone starts shooting at you. At that point right vs wrong is not relevent...it becomes just a matter of survival. What do you the next Russian pilot will do when a Turk lights him up...bail out and hope he isn't shot while floating down? LOL

IMHO either the Turks or the Russiand will have to stand down. If not the war might be short but it will be war. And that either pulls NATO in or destoys it.

And now that I think of it: some have claimed that Russia is truly paranoid about NATO. Not sure how true that might be. But if it is then Putin might think of attacking the Turks as a fairly low risk shot to discredit NATO. If they don't retaliate he wins. If they do he could back off, issue his own "apology" to the Turks and show the Russian people that NATO is a true threat go Mother Russia... a valuable asset to any politician seeking support of his citizens.

[Keith_McClary]

If you have EVIDENCE to support your implication that the US military is lying or that the NYT is lying, please feel free to share.

Until then, feel free to engage in empty speculation.

Was NYT lying about Iraq WMDs ? I would want EVIDENCE that they are not lying. A start would be telling us who gave them this classified info. I am always suspicious when classified info is leaked to the media without any repercussions to the leakers. Obviously these are authorized leaks (= planting propaganda in the media).

[Cid_Yama]

Turkey now claiming it had no idea it was a Russian plane. Please.

But they are now doing a lot of Russian butt kissing. Lavrov, has said they have no plans to attack Turkey ... and kiss a little to the left.

[Cid_Yama]

I'll tell you what, I have plans to attack Turkey, just as soon as it comes out of the oven.

[AgentR11]

S400s are now deployed.

Unless F22's will be doing the hunting, and no asymmetric response targets are available. Any Russian jet shot down will almost certainly result in one or more Turkish/US/NATO jets shot down during the engagement.

Law of War does not require you to restrict your return fire to the shooting aircraft. So even if an F22 fires the shot, any Turkish/NATO aircraft flying is a valid target for those S400's and those S400's can reach DEEEEEEEP into Turkey.

Consequently, its interesting that Russian bombardment of a Syria/Turkey border crossing, ie, right on the border, is underway.

Turkey took that shot yesterday because they knew the target would be unable to return fire, or even detect that it was fired upon until it was hit. That is no longer the case.

[ROCKMAN]

GASMON - If Russia attacks Turk aircraft NATO, including the US ,is legally obligated to enter the battle. If this senario develops no one will be paying much attention to ISIS because the entire region becomes a free fire zone.

So you're either very correct or very wrong, And we'll find out quicky which is right the next time a Russian aircraft approaches the Turk border.

[AgentR11]

Russia aircraft are all over that border... right now.