Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14

GarryB wrote:It would be more logical for them to block the straights to non Black Sea fleets... ie the rest of HATO.

Blocking Russian ships is of no advantage to them but blocking other HATO countries from putting ships in the Black Sea during potential tensions with Greece and/or France would make sense for them to limit the directs of attack perhaps...

The advantage of blocking everyone is political. Less blowback.

Quite a fleet in the Med now, some slipping in almost unnoticed via Gibraltar. Not a good picture for identification purposes.

Good write up on the airbase.

https://www.stalkerzone.org/were-here-for-a-long-time-what-russia-has-turned-its-base-in-syria-into/

The advantage of blocking everyone is political. Less blowback.

Blocking non Black Sea states only is probably more convenient, unless they want problems with gas via south stream... why would Russia supply gas to a country that is blocking her sea access to an important war zone where she is fighting terrorism...

Isos wrote:They are not allowed to block it unless they are at war.

It's also a big income for their economy, they wouldn't close it now in the middle of the pandemic .

I have covered this before...

Turkey under specific conditions can block the straights to another country even if they aren't at war, legally speaking.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:They are not allowed to block it unless they are at war.

It's also a big income for their economy, they wouldn't close it now in the middle of the pandemic .

I have covered this before...

Turkey under specific conditions can block the straights to another country even if they aren't at war, legally speaking.

Bosporos is international waters. Turkey has no right to block it unless they want to have war with Russia.

Tai Hai Chen wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:They are not allowed to block it unless they are at war.

It's also a big income for their economy, they wouldn't close it now in the middle of the pandemic .

I have covered this before...

Turkey under specific conditions can block the straights to another country even if they aren't at war, legally speaking.

Bosporos is international waters. Turkey has no right to block it unless they want to have war with Russia.

Vastly incorrect Turkey does not need to be at war to close the straights them may do so if the "danger of war" is present. Maybe you should read for yourself then take what people say here has fact. Btw the Bosporos isn't international waters, that is territory recognized worldwide has belonging to the Turks, whoever told you that was stupid.

They are used for international navigation, yes but legally speaking the that is Turkishs waters.



Article 6 of the Montreux Conventionn.

"Should Turkey consider herself to be threatened with imminent danger of war, the provisions of Article 2 shall nevertheless continue to be applied except that vessels must enter the Straits and their transit must be affected by the route which shall, in each case1 be indicated by the Turkish authorities".

Article two covers Merchant ships and the convention defines merchant vessels as ships not belonging to government bodies, etc navy, government controlled companies.

Turkey could very well claim anything in terms of "imminent danger of war" they have the full legal ability to prevent Russians from transporting military cargo through the straghts.

The Montreux convention is an agreement which Russia can withdraw from at any time if they choose to do so.

Their withdrawal would mean the straights would be treated as any other stretch of water, which Russia has every right to pass through.

Look at where the Baltic Sea opens out to the Atlantic Ocean... those countries near the entrance could easily block all shipping traffic entering the Baltic Sea if they wanted to but they never have and it has never been suggested because they have no right to... international shipping has the right to sail through because the Baltic Sea is not the territory of one country... just like the Black Sea is occupied by different nations too, they have right of access to international waters.

Turkey wont block Russian shipping without a very very good reason, and the Russians wont withdraw from the convention because it limits access for the UK and France and the US, who would have ships in there permanently if Turkey let them. They have less reason to let them than Russia does... US ships in the Black Sea are fish in a barrel with the muzzle of a punt gun pointed at it....

GarryB wrote:The Montreux convention is an agreement which Russia can withdraw from at any time if they choose to do so.

Their withdrawal would mean the straights would be treated as any other stretch of water, which Russia has every right to pass through.

Look at where the Baltic Sea opens out to the Atlantic Ocean... those countries near the entrance could easily block all shipping traffic entering the Baltic Sea if they wanted to but they never have and it has never been suggested because they have no right to... international shipping has the right to sail through because the Baltic Sea is not the territory of one country... just like the Black Sea is occupied by different nations too, they have right of access to international waters.

Turkey wont block Russian shipping without a very very good reason, and the Russians wont withdraw from the convention because it limits access for the UK and France and the US, who would have ships in there permanently if Turkey let them. They have less reason to let them than Russia does... US ships in the Black Sea are fish in a barrel with the muzzle of a punt gun pointed at it....

Lol Russia cannot pull out the convention and do what it pleases with the straights what type of revisionist crap you trying to spread now.

If Russia pulls out, the Turks can tell any Russian ship to "fuck off" and if they attempt to violate Turkish Waters, the Turks have every legal right to sink those ships. Just has Russia would have any legal rights to sink any ships that enter their sovereign waters. Btw I am expecting you to go "Weh tell that to the US". We don't enter their territorial waters we come close but remain in free seas so don't even try to use that idiotic argument.

Again by the RULES of the convention turkey CAN, so stop that lying BS. It's written in plain English. It's doesn't matter what you think, how you feel, how you want to lie and word it. I find it oh so funny when you blatantly lie.

Turks control the straights, those are their waters, and by the legal ruling which Russia has agreed to if the Turks can close the straights to them under two conditions.

End of story.

He's right Garry, its transit under the terms of the Convention or no transit. I suspect you are thinking of 'transit rights' which actually don't exist in the Bosphorus. I don't often quote from Wiki but it seems safe in this case.

"The legal regime of transit passage exists for all straits used for international navigation where there is not a simple alternative route, and where there is no long-standing international convention governing the straits such as for the Danish Straits, the Turkish Straits, and the Strait of Magellan."

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Lol Russia cannot pull out the convention and do what it pleases with the straights what type of revisionist crap you trying to spread now.

If Russia pulls out, the Turks can tell any Russian ship to "fuck off" and if they attempt to violate Turkish Waters, the Turks have every legal right to sink those ships. Just has Russia would have any legal rights to sink any ships that enter their sovereign waters. Btw I am expecting you to go "Weh tell that to the US". We don't enter their territorial waters we come close but remain in free seas so don't even try to use that idiotic argument.

Again by the RULES of the convention turkey CAN, so stop that lying BS. It's written in plain English. It's doesn't matter what you think, how you feel, how you want to lie and word it. I find it oh so funny when you blatantly lie.

Turks control the straights, those are their waters, and by the legal ruling which Russia has agreed to if the Turks can close the straights to them under two conditions.

End of story.

Turkey has a vastly weaker military, is alienated from her NATO allies, has a sizeable ethnic minority with a grievance, and lots of beef with other countries in the neighborhood (Most of the Arab countries minus Qatar for being MB aligned) and even further (sponsoring Uighur separatists in China comes to mind). She is in no way shape or form equipped to fight a shooting war with Russia, a military superpower. The bit about quoting laws to men with swords apply here even if Russia doesn't have significant control over Turkey's economy.

More gear under test by the look of it.

Isos wrote:

If Russia pulls out, the Turks can tell any Russian ship to "fuck off" and if they attempt to violate Turkish Waters, the Turks have every legal right to sink those ships. Just has Russia would have any legal rights to sink any ships that enter their sovereign waters. Btw I am expecting you to go "Weh tell that to the US". We don't enter their territorial waters we come close but remain in free seas so don't even try to use that idiotic argument.

You have no legal rights to sink a ship that isn't threatening you even if it comes in your waters.

If Turkey wants to play the military card, they better let Russian go there because Russia may blow up Turkey and make them loose the european part making the strait half Greek with a Russian base there and no Turkish navy.

You actually do, it might not be a good idea to do it but if a ship trespasses in your waters you can do whatever you want to it.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Tai Hai Chen wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:They are not allowed to block it unless they are at war.

It's also a big income for their economy, they wouldn't close it now in the middle of the pandemic .

I have covered this before...

Turkey under specific conditions can block the straights to another country even if they aren't at war, legally speaking.

Bosporos is international waters. Turkey has no right to block it unless they want to have war with Russia.

Vastly incorrect Turkey does not need to be at war to close the straights them may do so if the "danger of war" is present. Maybe you should read for yourself then take what people say here has fact. Btw the Bosporos isn't international waters, that is territory recognized worldwide has belonging to the Turks, whoever told you that was stupid.

They are used for international navigation, yes but legally speaking the that is Turkishs waters.



Article 6 of the Montreux Conventionn.

"Should Turkey consider herself to be threatened with imminent danger of war, the provisions of Article 2 shall nevertheless continue to be applied except that vessels must enter the Straits and their transit must be affected by the route which shall, in each case1 be indicated by the Turkish authorities".

Article two covers Merchant ships and the convention defines merchant vessels as ships not belonging to government bodies, etc navy, government controlled companies.

Turkey could very well claim anything in terms of "imminent danger of war" they have the full legal ability to prevent Russians from transporting military cargo through the straghts.

Ocean does not belong to humanity let alone to a certain nation. Even rivers belonging to nations is questionable. Bosporos is international water. There is no dispute about that. No part of any ocean belongs to any nation. There is no if. There is no but. End of story.

Lol are you serious? this has to be a troll post.

Lol Russia cannot pull out the convention and do what it pleases with the straights what type of revisionist crap you trying to spread now.

It is an agreement, why would they not be able to withdraw from the agreement?

If Russia pulls out, the Turks can tell any Russian ship to "fuck off" and if they attempt to violate Turkish Waters, the Turks have every legal right to sink those ships.

Sinking ships is an act of war... and at the moment I suspect few of her HATO allies would back her in trying to block Russia inside the Black Sea.

If Turkey chooses to sink Russian ships, Russia has every right to destroy the means the Turks used to sink those ships... shoot down planes, sink Turkish military vessels, destroy ports etc etc.

Just has Russia would have any legal rights to sink any ships that enter their sovereign waters.

A ship sailing into your waters gives you no rights to sink them... when has that ever happened in peace time?

Btw I am expecting you to go "Weh tell that to the US". We don't enter their territorial waters we come close but remain in free seas so don't even try to use that idiotic argument.

That is not true... US ships entered Soviet waters by claiming right of passage in the Black Sea before and were rammed for their efforts... not sunk...

Again by the RULES of the convention turkey CAN, so stop that lying BS. It's written in plain English. It's doesn't matter what you think, how you feel, how you want to lie and word it. I find it oh so funny when you blatantly lie.

Who is lying. The Convention only applies if the signatory countries agree to keep abiding by it. If Russia feels they are going to be blocked into the Black Sea indefinitely then why continue to follow such rules? That would be stupid.

It is not like the US doesn't tear up agreements they see as worthless or holding them back...

Turks control the straights, those are their waters, and by the legal ruling which Russia has agreed to if the Turks can close the straights to them under two conditions.

The Turks control the straights by the convention because all the fleets inside the Black Sea have agreed to it... the US would love for the straights to be free navigation because they could send hundreds of ships in there and leave them there for years, So it would need to be something pretty serious for Russia to withdraw from that treaty and risk the US doing just that. If Turkey was to decide to block all Russian shipping through the straights for an indefinite period, then not being a part of the treaty is the best option for Russia.

In the video above two US vessels were testing the rule that you can sail through a countries territorial waters if you were sailing straight from international waters to international waters. In that case the Soviet Union objected to that trivial attempt to violate Soviet waters on a technicality... Soviet waters in this case not being necessary for the US ships to sail to to get where they were going.

Without the Convention the Russians could simply say they will sail in a straight line through the straights from international waters in the Black Sea to international waters in the Med... all legal and above board. If Turkey wants to create an incident by trying to stop them.... well we will see how that turns out.

He's right Garry, its transit under the terms of the Convention or no transit. I suspect you are thinking of 'transit rights' which actually don't exist in the Bosphorus. I don't often quote from Wiki but it seems safe in this case.

"The legal regime of transit passage exists for all straits used for international navigation where there is not a simple alternative route, and where there is no long-standing international convention governing the straits such as for the Danish Straits, the Turkish Straits, and the Strait of Magellan."

Russia withdrawing from the convention would mean the convention no longer applies.

Does Turkey want to go to war with Russia to stop them trading with the world via the Black Sea ports?

More gear under test by the look of it.

New VDV vehicles that can be transported in a Hip. In another photo on the VDV thread there was one command vehicle with a Kord HMG, and four ATGM vehicles... two with Kornet and two with Konkurs.

You actually do, it might not be a good idea to do it but if a ship trespasses in your waters you can do whatever you want to it.

No you can't.

Everything you said was wrong Garry, literally wrong. You are making shit up, lying, and just about everything else. Very idiotic comments you made in regards to the straights above.. Your extreme bias is showing.

if Russia pulls out of the convention then it cannot transit the straight if the turks go "You may no longer have your ships enter our waters". The Entire point of the convention was to prevent the Turks from being able to do this from countries that have ports in the black sea.

The Straights are territorial waters of Turkey you biased, revisionist. Russia has no say if they pull out on what they can send through the straights at that point Turkey can tell them to go to hell and Russia cannot do jack shit. The Straights AREN'T INTERNATIONAL WATERS and freedom of transit don't apply to them. You don't know what you are talking about at all.

Btw yes any foreign ship that violates sovereign waters can be destroyed.

You would give them a warning sure, but any ship or plane that enters your airspace or territorial waters can be destroyed legally.

There are certain conditions where you legally couldn't such as inviting the ship etc.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Everything you said was wrong Garry, literally wrong. You are making shit up, lying, and just about everything else. Very idiotic comments you made in regards to the straights above.. Your extreme bias is showing.

if Russia pulls out of the convention then it cannot transit the straight if the turks go "You may no longer have your ships enter our waters". The Entire point of the convention was to prevent the Turks from being able to do this from countries that have ports in the black sea.

The Straights are territorial waters of Turkey you biased, revisionist. Russia has no say if they pull out on what they can send through the straights at that point Turkey can tell them to go to hell and Russia cannot do jack shit. The Straights AREN'T INTERNATIONAL WATERS and freedom of transit don't apply to them. You don't know what you are talking about at all.

Btw yes any foreign ship that violates sovereign waters can be destroyed.

You would give them a warning sure, but any ship or plane that enters your airspace or territorial waters can be destroyed legally.

There are certain conditions where you legally couldn't such as inviting the ship etc.

Human is land animal. Human has no dominion over ocean. Bosporos strait does not belong to any country. Any water part of ocean, as in the case of Bosporos, is international territory. No country has the right to close any part of ocean unless in war.

Tai Hai Chen wrote:
Human is land animal. Human has no dominion over ocean. Bosporos strait does not belong to any country. Any water part of ocean, as in the case of Bosporos, is international territory. No country has the right to close any part of ocean unless in war.

We might be a land animal but the sea close to our land does by agreement belong to the nearest land.

I don't think that the Chinese Government takes your view.

Isos wrote:because Russia may blow up Turkey and make them loose the european part making the strait half Greek with a Russian base there and no Turkish navy.

The Su 24 shot down was Russian. The F-16 that shot it down was Turkish.