Turkey relations with US and NATO

Did NATO support the IRA too?

Hannibal Barca wrote:Unfortunately the answer is yes, when the time is due, and we Greeks need to hang our politicians from the balls!!

As Sa'iqa wrote:Turkey should disintegrate. With Islamists in power Turkey will be a major source of trouble in the Middle East for years to come, together with Saudi Arabia and Iran. I support the creation of a buffer zone in form of independent Kurdiststan made of parts of Turkey, all Kurdish-majority parts of Iraq and Syria and maybe some parts of Iran.

It would be best if that Kurdish state was ruled by communists (PKK/PYD). it should be not only secular but fiercely anti-Islamic.All mosques should be designated as enemy military installations and destroyed, possession of any Islamic literature (quran, hadith collections, sharia books etc.) should be treated as state treason and all muslim clerics should have status of enemy combatants.

As for Turkey, a Kemalist should take control. And Turkey out of NATO actually means less trouble for... Greece.

I agree with you first point, but everything after that.... Creating a new state, especially one that is "anti-Islamic", would only create more division in an already unstable Middle East. It would be déjà vu all over again... Plus, most Kurds are Islamic (Shia at the very least) and probably wouldn't except anything otherwise... Nevermind that the concept of Communism has never properly been enforced on to them. A great idea in practice, a terrible one in the real world. 

Mike E wrote:
Unfortunately? Why? Losing Turkey would be terrible for NATO, and great for someone like Russia who could begin large trade with them...

GarryB wrote:Hey Asssian, there is a rules and introductions section where you can introduce yourself properly and have a read of the rules here on this forum and read a bit about the other members here.

Note it is a forum rule that you introduce yourself with your own thread in the introduction section, but you don't need to delete any of your posts.  

I agree that both Russia and Turkey would benefit from better relations... whether Turkey is a member of NATO or not.

GarryB wrote:I am a kiwi.... 100 years ago we fought on the battlefield and murdered each other in a defeat for our side at Gallipoli.... but the respect and honour you showed with our dead means I have nothing but respect... the US forgave the Japanese and the Germans despite both countries killing more Americans than Russia ever did... it is a shame we can't get over the past so we can move forward, but so many are fixated by the past and don't look at what they are doing now and just repeat the old mistakes of the past.

I am fascinated by military equipment... particularly the engineering and development and improvement but I would be happiest if such equipment is trained with and never used for real.

Sadly sometimes it has to be used so it is good it is there, but all the alternatives need to be used before going for the gun and the bomb... no matter how accurate and powerful they are.

Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu says Ankara hopes to work with the United States and the international community to establish a no-fly zone over northern Syria to protect civilians amid the civil war in the country.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Ankara hopes to work with the United States and the international community to establish a no-fly zone over northern Syria to protect civilians amid the civil war in the country, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told the BBC Tuesday.

The Turkish prime minister noted in the interview that it is necessary to create “an area where civilians can stay without any fear of being attacked and killed" in Syria.

“If there was a no-fly zone and a safe haven inside Syria, there wouldn’t be such a flow [of migrants to the EU countries],” Davutoglu said.

To date, Turkey is home to the largest contingent of Syrian refugees in the world, and has reportedly spent $6 billion on helping these migrants. Turkey has also repeatedly blamed the European Union for not doing enough to help refugees fleeing conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa.

Syria has been in a state of civil war since 2011, with the government battling several insurgent groups, including the Nusra Front and the Islamic State. More than 220,000 people have died and millions have been displaced as a result of the long-standing military violence in the country, according to the UN.

zenmonk wrote:...Which means the real adversary is Russia.....what are the options available for Russia to counter this move? Will they use their S 3oo/.4oo or Will they scramble the Su 30 sm deployed there ?

nemrod wrote:

zenmonk wrote:...Which means the real adversary is Russia.....what are the options available for Russia to counter this move? Will they use their S 3oo/.4oo or Will they scramble the Su 30 sm deployed there ?

Nope. US have no intentions to fight russian fighters. Since mid September, all NATO communications from Incirilik, and Adana are completely jammed, and disabled. Russian fighters used fly above turkish's sky. All NATO hardwares are completely ineffective, including AWACS, Elint, F-22, etc.... The deployment of F-15 C is a political aim, it is a message to all NATO allies that are now more and more realizing that US lost electronic warfare. The message to US allies "do not worry we are sending our state of the art". Nevertheless, I don't see what could do F-15 C, as they could not use their air to air missiles. F-15 could down the SU-30 if F-15 outnumber the SU-30. In this case it is the case. But Russia has many other assets and could easily overrun  US aircrafts. Russia does not need S-300, or S-400 to down US aircrafts, as they won electronic warfare.

JohninMK wrote:

nemrod wrote:

zenmonk wrote:...Which means the real adversary is Russia.....what are the options available for Russia to counter this move? Will they use their S 3oo/.4oo or Will they scramble the Su 30 sm deployed there ?

Nope. US have no intentions to fight russian fighters. Since mid September, all NATO communications from Incirilik, and Adana are completely jammed, and disabled. Russian fighters used fly above turkish's sky. All NATO hardwares are completely ineffective, including AWACS, Elint, F-22, etc.... The deployment of F-15 C is a political aim, it is a message to all NATO allies that are now more and more realizing that US lost electronic warfare. The message to US allies "do not worry we are sending our state of the art". Nevertheless, I don't see what could do F-15 C, as they could not use their air to air missiles. F-15 could down the SU-30 if F-15 outnumber the SU-30. In this case it is the case. But Russia has many other assets and could easily overrun  US aircrafts. Russia does not need S-300, or S-400 to down US aircrafts, as they won electronic warfare.

Out of curiosity, how do you know this?