Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Pentagon warns Turkey against Syria ground invasion after strikes threaten US troops


Grim Reaper 6
 Share

Recommended Posts

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Wednesday spoke by phone with his Turkish counterpart, conveying his “strong opposition” to a new Turkish military operation in Syria, according to a Pentagon readout on the call. The Pentagon is warning NATO member Turkey against a new military operation in Syria, after strikes in the country late last month endangered U.S. troops. Austin “expressed concern over escalating action in northern Syria and Turkey, including recent airstrikes, some of which directly threatened the safety of U.S. personnel who are working with local partners in Syria to defeat ISIS,” the readout said.  Secretary Austin called for de-escalation, and shared the Department’s strong opposition to a new Turkish military operation in Syria.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pentagon-warns-turkey-against-syria-ground-invasion-after-strikes-threaten-us-troops/ar-AA14NC37?ocid=EMMX&cvid=97a67dd55f014812971ceb2097cfcb64

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I hope none of our guys has to die to stop an ALLY from attacking other of our allies.  

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, and-then said:

I hope none of our guys has to die to stop an ALLY from attacking other of our allies.  

I know Turkey is an Allie on paper anyway, but I have never trusted them especially now based upon their actions. I believe that Turkey has been in bed with Russia for many years now, and the War in the Ukraine has proven that to be true.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

I know Turkey is an Allie on paper anyway, but I have never trusted them especially now based upon their actions. I believe that Turkey has been in bed with Russia for many years now, and the War in the Ukraine has proven that to be true.

NATO is deeply divided. We have seen a clear example of that with the missile incident in Poland. No one could agree on anything.

That's usually the problem when you pursue a policy of infinite expansion. Each member country has it's own core interests and sometimes they don't align with each other.

Turkey's interests in Syria don't align with that of the U.S.

Edited by Occult1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

No one could agree on anything.

I've been pretty consistent on this war effort.  I think everyone would have been better off had Ukraine not been set on becoming part of NATO.  I think a gentlemen's agreement when the USSR collapsed, should have been honored.  There was no need for NATO to station troops and sophisticated weaponry on Russia's borders.  We would NEVER accept that from Russia, China, Iran...  we'd fight first.

Since the situation unfolded as it has, I think there isn't going to be a good end to this for anyone involved.  Depending on which information sources one trusts, Russia is either nearly on the ropes, running short of precision weapons and even skilled manpower...OR they are doing something that has always been quintessentially Russian - trading space for time and allowing their enemies to spend themselves on the terrain.  It worked with Napoleon, Hitler, the Turks...  Those who think Russia is playing a long game also believe that it will be the west that loses resolve due to massive, endless amounts of weaponry and ammo that Ukraine will use, possibly for many more months or even years.

I don't know who is accurate but I do know that Biden's Pentagon clown in chief - Milley - came out the other day and basically said Ukraine had accomplish MUCH more than anyone really expected BUT it was unrealistic to expect for them to ever win militarily, the removal of all Russian forces from Ukraine-including Crimea.

Biden's handlers shouted him down immediately and I think THAT should give all serious Americans a reason to pause.  This guy is head of the JCS and as such is supposed to be the ultimate authority on military issues.  If HE thinks it's time for negotiations to stop this madness and he's being overruled by politicians, we could be on the edge of a VERY serious problem.  I'll say it again.  Putin cannot lose and survive.  There is NO indication that anyone in Russia is willing to try to take him down so that isn't going to save Ukraine.  I'm hearing more voices, getting louder, that the west should do whatever it takes, including mass amounts of ammo and even more sophisticated weapons systems (that can hit targets INSIDE RUSSIA) to finally break the Russians and force them out.

I've come to believe that the risk of a nuclear escalation is nearly non-existent BUT, not impossible.  I think the one and only situation that could cause Putin to roll those dice would be a perception that NATO forces were on the ground fighting against his troops..IN Russian territory.  God only knows if these neocon globalists are that insane but I think if this goes on long enough, we just might find that they are. :(

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Occult1 said:

NATO is deeply divided. We have seen a clear example of that with the missile incident in Poland. No one could agree on anything.

That's usually the problem when you pursue a policy of infinite expansion. Each member country has it's own core interests and sometimes they don't align with each other.

Turkey's interests in Syria don't align with that of the U.S.

So you are saying a nato member will go with their own interests 1st and place group interests last?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, and-then said:

I've come to believe that the risk of a nuclear escalation is nearly non-existent

Why if you think

19 minutes ago, and-then said:

   Putin cannot lose and survive.

 

Edited by the13bats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, the13bats said:

So you are saying a nato member will go with their own interests 1st and place group interests last?

Most of them wouldn't but I think Erdogan is now an ally in name only.  As for complaining about NATO having trouble agreeing, that wasn't a bug, thank God, it's a feature.  When an event happens that comes so close to activating article V, there NEEDS to be a lot of discussion and care.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, the13bats said:

Why if...

 

The full quote:

I've come to believe that the risk of a nuclear escalation is nearly non-existent BUT, not impossible.

I think he will do everything he can to end the war on his terms, to the extent possible, but if the DC neocon crowd push this thing to the point where we begin supplying longer range missiles for the HIMARS and Ukraine begins deracinating Russian positions in Crimea, the whole thing could blow up in our faces.  Hell, his main advisor, Dugin, is making not so subtle threats against his rule because they see him as too weak against NATO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, the13bats said:

So you are saying a nato member will go with their own interests 1st and place group interests last?

The problem is that Turkey sees the Syrian Kurds as a domestic threat. The U.S. sees them as a reliable partner in the region.

You have a conflict of interests between two NATO members. ''Group interests'' often only mean U.S. interests first. Erdogan simply does not want to fall in line.

Enlargement & open door policies of NATO are bound to lead to these kinds of situations.

Edited by Occult1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony is that Russia might be able to solve the conflict by acting as an intermediary between the SDF and Turkey.

Russian commander in Syria meets Kurdish counterpart amid Turkish offensive

https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/2022/11/29/russian-commander-in-syria-meets-kurdish-counterpart-amid-turkish-offensive/

 

''Negotiations between Russia and Turkey are now ongoing over the planned operation. Turkish sources told Al Jazeera that Russia is working to meet Turkey’s demands in northern Syria, so as to avoid a Turkish ground operation against the People’s Protection Units.''

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/11/29/what-is-delaying-turkeys-ground-operation-in-northern-syria

Edited by Occult1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

The irony is that Russia might be able to solve the conflict by acting as an intermediary between the SDF and Turkey.

Might be hard to do as Russia is preoccupied with unrest in their own semi-autonomous regions.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Might be hard to do as Russia is preoccupied with unrest in their own semi-autonomous regions.

Seems they take the situation seriously in Northern Syria:

Russia sends troop reinforcements to Kurdish-controlled northern Syria

''Russia deployed troop reinforcements Wednesday to an area of northern Syria controlled by Kurdish fighters and government troops, residents and a war monitor said, amid fears of a Turkish ground incursion.

The move by Damascus ally Moscow comes after Ankara launched air strikes on Kurdish targets in Syria and Iraq on November 20, a week after a deadly Istanbul bombing that it blamed on Kurdish militants, who have denied responsibility.

Residents of Tal Rifaat, a Kurdish-held pocket north of Aleppo, told AFP that Russian troop reinforcements had reached the city.''

https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20221201-russia-sends-troop-reinforcements-to-kurdish-controlled-northern-syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

 Secretary Austin called for de-escalation, and shared the Department’s strong opposition to a new Turkish military operation in Syria.”

Turkey wants to watch their shi7.  Erdogan is a very unreliable ally, and there's rumbling in NATO that if he doesn't behave and pull his finger out over Finland, Ukraine and Sweden joining NATO, that NATO may well jettison Turkey, or downgrade their membership.  It's been on the cards for years now.  Does NATO need religious totalitarian borderliners like Erdogan at all?  Well, the Bosphorus strait is an important waterway, but the Black Sea isn't that important globally.

Edited by Alchopwn
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

 that NATO may well jettison Turkey, or downgrade their membership.  It's been on the cards for years now.

Not gonna happen.

The Turkish Armed Forces is the second largest standing military force in NATO, after the U.S. Removing Turkey from NATO would severely weaken the alliance.

Turkey leading contributor of forces to NATO: Ankara

https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/diplomacy/turkey-leading-contributor-of-forces-to-nato-ankara

 

Turkey owns NATO and they know it.

Edited by Occult1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and-then said:

The full quote:

I've come to believe that the risk of a nuclear escalation is nearly non-existent BUT, not impossible.

I think he will do everything he can to end the war on his terms, to the extent possible, but if the DC neocon crowd push this thing to the point where we begin supplying longer range missiles for the HIMARS and Ukraine begins deracinating Russian positions in Crimea, the whole thing could blow up in our faces.  Hell, his main advisor, Dugin, is making not so subtle threats against his rule because they see him as too weak against NATO.

I saw but left off your "not impossible" because i wanted to keep my question simple as i really dont think anyone sees nukes as a realistic option.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

Turkey wants to watch their shi7.  Erdogan is a very unreliable ally, and there's rumbling in NATO that if he doesn't behave and pull his finger out over Finland, Ukraine and Sweden joining NATO, that NATO may well jettison Turkey, or downgrade their membership.  It's been on the cards for years now.  Does NATO need religious totalitarian borderliners like Erdogan at all?  Well, the Bosphorus strait is an important waterway, but the Black Sea isn't that important globally.

I agree with you completely while Turkey is an Allie on paper that’s where it ends, I don’t trust them as far as I could pick up and throw Erdogan.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, the13bats said:

I saw but left off your "not impossible" because i wanted to keep my question simple as i really dont think anyone sees nukes as a realistic option.

That’s for dam sure!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

Seems they take the situation seriously in Northern Syria:

Seems like things are falling apart all over the Russian sphere of influence.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 4:06 PM, Occult1 said:

Not gonna happen.

The Turkish Armed Forces is the second largest standing military force in NATO, after the U.S. Removing Turkey from NATO would severely weaken the alliance.

Turkey leading contributor of forces to NATO: Ankara

https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/diplomacy/turkey-leading-contributor-of-forces-to-nato-ankara

 

Turkey owns NATO and they know it.

You're using a Turkish article to try to support some notion that Turkie is a crucial part of NATO?  I suppose you believe Russian propaganda too.  As the saying goes "You can fool some of the people all of the time".

How about looking at some actual statistics Oc?  The fact is, the main value of Turkie isn't economic or in its "contribution" but is purely positional, due to its location to the Caucuses and Southern Russia and of course the Bosphorus as the gate to the Black Sea, effectively locking the Russian Black Sea Fleet in.

It is unequivocally the USA who owns NATO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/1/2022 at 10:42 PM, and-then said:

I think a gentlemen's agreement when the USSR collapsed, should have been honored.

There isn’t a gentleman’s agreement engineered in Russia that’s worth it’s weight in toilet paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turkey has unfortunately been drifting a little religious fundy the last few years.

These things come and go, hopefully in time they will drift back towards reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/1/2022 at 11:05 PM, and-then said:

The full quote:

I've come to believe that the risk of a nuclear escalation is nearly non-existent BUT, not impossible.

I think he will do everything he can to end the war on his terms, to the extent possible, but if the DC neocon crowd push this thing to the point where we begin supplying longer range missiles for the HIMARS and Ukraine begins deracinating Russian positions in Crimea, the whole thing could blow up in our faces.  Hell, his main advisor, Dugin, is making not so subtle threats against his rule because they see him as too weak against NATO.

It is incredibly annoying when people manipulate your post to try to pretend you think another way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.