The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[joecct]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

So Canada was able to muster up a full half-squadron of fighters, two recon planes, and an airborne fuel tanker. Gee, thanks. Were they going to add a few spit wads into the mix, too?

You forgot the ice rinks. Curling and Hockey will save the world!

Oh and Timbits.

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Isn't that Lynah? I didn't think Kepler was employed by a defense contractor...

Lynah might be defense also (I thought energy sector out in Cali.), but I know Kepler has flat out stated that he does, joking about it a couple times while rooting for more missiles (or something) to be used in the Middle East.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Frankly, end NATO. It's another waste of time and money. We spend more money on defending Europe then they do. Time for that to end.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

He's an employee for a defense, has a vested interest in the US spending money on these sorts of things. In economics it's called "rent seeking".

Isn't that Lynah? I didn't think Kepler was employed by a defense contractor...

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

They're more responsible for the three state Iraq solution (the only one that made sense) not happening because they cower in fear every time the Kurds are mentioned.

Yes, kick them out of NATA. Fine with me. They're worthless anyway.

You appear to want the US to police the World as much as anyone else does. I don't. Complete waste of money, treasure, time, and effort.

He's an employee for a defense, has a vested interest in the US spending money on these sorts of things. In economics it's called "rent seeking".

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Yeah, that's me all over.

Well, you want to protect Turkey. I don't understand how the hell we're obligated to defend them when they've done NOTHING in their own backyard while we've blown trillions and lives.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

You appear to want the US to police the World as much as anyone else does.

Yeah, that's me all over.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

They're more responsible for the three state Iraq solution (the only one that made sense) not happening because they cower in fear every time the Kurds are mentioned.

Yes, kick them out of NATA. Fine with me. They're worthless anyway.

You appear to want the US to police the World as much as anyone else does. I don't. Complete waste of money, treasure, time, and effort.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Why? They won't let us use their airfields. They won't protect their own state. Why should we respond????

Because they are an ally under treaty. If we would refuse to defend them then we should sever the alliance. But as long as they are a formal ally we should honor the alliance, to protect the integrity of the concept of "alliance."

It may well be time to rethink Turkey's membership in NATO. NATO exists to deter attack by Russia on Western Europe by formally committing the US to military response. All well and good -- NATO has done a great job and as a side effect has helped stabilize Europe after the two world wars. But that mechanism is not enhanced by including Turkey. Heck, Australia isn't part of NATO. Alliances have different purposes.

Turkey is in NATO because:

1) The US wants every forward deployment base we can get surrounding those delicious Middle Eastern oil reserves

2) As a symbolic gesture that Turkey is "part of Europe"

3) Because Turkey used to be a secular counter-example to the religious states of the Muslim world

If Erdoğan indicates the future of Turkey, 3) is eliminated. 1) becomes less and less important as we move away from our slavery to the Saudi royal family. That leaves 2), which is a hardly a good enough reason to tolerate all the additional stresses on NATO that Turkey's membership creates.

If they fail to live up to their NATO responsibilities that's a good pretext to kick them out.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Since ISIS is not a recognized state, it's not an invasion, it's a terrorist attack. I do not know if we are obligated to respond to that (though we should).

Why? They won't let us use their airfields. They won't protect their own state. Why should we respond????

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

If ISIS invades Turkey, would that be a foreign invasion in which we'd be required by NATO treaty to come to Turkey's defense? If so, that might be the height of irony.

Since ISIS is not a recognized state, it's not an invasion, it's a terrorist attack. I do not know if we are obligated to respond to that (though we should).

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

If ISIS invades Turkey, would that be a foreign invasion in which we'd be required by NATO treaty to come to Turkey's defense? If so, that might be the height of irony.

I seriously doubt ISIS would invade Turkey, but if they did, it would certainly be ironic. Of course I suppose we could say our bombing, which we're already doing, is coming to their defense. Turkey in recent years seems to be behaving less and less as an ally and responsible member of NATO.

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

If ISIS invades Turkey, would that be a foreign invasion in which we'd be required by NATO treaty to come to Turkey's defense? If so, that might be the height of irony.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

So, for Turkey to save itself we have to fix Syria? And if we fix that does it just turn into another Iraq that we supposedly fixed?

**** the whole area. Get out.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Washington said its war planes, along with those of coalition ally the United Arab Emirates, had struck nine targets in Syria, including six near Kobani that hit Islamic State artillery and armored vehicles. It also struck Islamic State positions in Iraq five times.

Nevertheless, Kobani remained under intense bombardment from Islamic State emplacements, within sight of Turkish tanks that have so far done nothing to help.

U.S. officials were quoted voicing impatience with the Turks for refusing to join the coalition against Islamic State fighters who have seized wide areas of Syria and Iraq. Turkey says it could join but only if Washington agrees to use force against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as well as the Sunni Muslim jihadists fighting him in a three-year-old civil war.

Yikes. That's pretty hardcore negotiating. "Nice ethnic minority ya got here. Would be a shame if somethin' happened to it."