# Turkey, NATO Ally, Shoots Down Russian Fighter Jet



## WhatInThe (Nov 24, 2015)

Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet after it flew into Turkey air space on Syria missions.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...owned-in-syria-interfax/ar-BBnnnBR?li=BBnb7Kz

Apparently they were warned several times not to enter Turkey's airspace. Some reports have the pilots being killed once they ejected and landed on the ground. Messy


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 24, 2015)

Whoa.....  stay tuned..   How is Russia going to respond?   No tellin'   This is a dangerous thing.


----------



## WhatInThe (Nov 24, 2015)

On one hand I see Russia's point most the flight time was over Syria. But once they are in Turkey's airspace/territory all bets are off, especially after warnings.

It's one thing to be humanitarian and let a damaged plane land on your turf but another to let a country conduct military operations. That's like letting a local gang use your front lawn to conduct their business. Sooner or later their enemy will think you are their ally.


----------



## oldman (Nov 24, 2015)

I remember in 1983 when the Russians downed a Korean Boeing 747 with all but 300 souls on-board. It was called an accident and the Russians claimed they had the right to do what they did because the Korean Airliner had strayed into their airspace. It was also noted that the pilot of the Russian jet fighter did indeed make visual confirmation before launching his missile. If it were me being the Russian pilot, why would I blow up a B-747? Unfortunately, the U.S. did have a spy plane on patrol in that area on the same night at the same time. That added to the Russian pilot's confusion, I guess. 

The pilot of the B-747 made a very huge mistake. As it turned out, he was not aware of his instruments readings and settings.


----------



## Debby (Nov 24, 2015)

First of all, 1983 the Soviet Union was still in power.  That was not Russia.

On our news, they said that the piece of Turkey's land protrudes into Syria like a small 'finger' and at most, the Russian jet was over Turkey for a matter of seconds.  So will that be the fatal few seconds that starts WW3?  

I've also read that one of Russia's targets has been the oil tanker trucks that are carrying stolen oil for ISIS to a 'buyer' which is one of their sources of revenue and by the way, it has also been reported that Turkey is the buyer of that oil.    When I first heard that, my feeling was 'finally someone has the brains to go after ISIS funding'!   But apparently since Russia started doing so, the American military realized that they could no longer sit on their hands on this one, so they started doing it too....but with one little change.   They like to drop leaflets and warn the drivers to run for the hills because America is coming in 45 minutes to bomb the trucks.    Maybe Turkish men are driving those trucks eh?   Wouldn't want to send your friends citizen's to paradise now would we?

I'm just going to give the link here and you can read it if you choose and beyond that, I'm not going to comment.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ves-isis-45-minute-warning-oil-tanker-strikes


----------



## jujube (Nov 24, 2015)

Oh, this is NOT going to end well....


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 24, 2015)

Debby said:


> First of all, 1983 the Soviet Union was still in power.  That was not Russia.
> 
> On our news, they said that the piece of Turkey's land protrudes into Syria like a small 'finger' and at most, the Russian jet was over Turkey for a matter of seconds.  So will that be the fatal few seconds that starts WW3?
> 
> ...



Our ABC reports that the Russian plane was warned repeatedly over five minutes. That is more than a couple of seconds..



> Turkish fighter jets have shot down a Russian warplane near the Syrian border, with conflicting claims over whether the downed aircraft violated Turkish airspace. The two pilots ejected by parachute before the jet exploded and crashed into a ball of flames in northern Syria.
> 
> Both pilots were shot dead as they descended, according to a commander with a Turkmen brigade which fights against the Syrian Armed Forces. Turkmen are Syrians of Turkish descent.
> 
> ...


----------



## imp (Nov 24, 2015)

*It Don't Take Much!*



Debby said:


> .  So will that be the fatal few seconds that starts WW3?



Let us hope not! OTOH, the world population again needs "thinning out": humankind and it's wars.........imp


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 24, 2015)

Geez Imp. Pot stirring my friend?


----------



## Laurie (Nov 24, 2015)

> "First of all, 1983 the Soviet Union was still in power. That was not Russia."



Maybe not, but Putin  was, at the time,  a senior officer in the KGB.

Leopards and spots and all that.

I think it will generate some pretty intense diplomatic activity.


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

And George Bush Senior was head of the CIA and we all know what they are capable of.  The word 'torture' pops into my mind whereas Putin was a paper pusher and recruiter of informants.   So which leopard would you like to discuss?  The one who got told what to do by his bosses, or one who was a boss?


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Our ABC reports that the Russian plane was warned repeatedly over five minutes. That is more than a couple of seconds..




And since then the second pilot has been rescued and is now saying that he never got warnings before or during the 17 seconds that it could have taken to cross the two mile wide strip of land that protrudes into Syria if they had done that.  Which by the way, an American spy satellite is now showing didn't happen.

'A Russian airman who has survived the downing of his warplane says Turkish jets did not issue any visual or radio warnings. Captain Konstantin Murakhtin said that he couldn't possibly have flown over into Turkish airspace because the crew knew the region "like the back of their hand".        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/12015465/Turkey-shoots-down-Russia-jet-live.html


And now from Rueters, 'American spy satellite says that Russian jet shot down over Syria'     http://www.reuters.com/article/2015...sis-syria-turkey-impact-idUSKBN0TE04M20151125


Nor are very many remembering how Erdogun said this back in 2012:    'In 2012, Ankara accused Syria of shooting down a Turkish F-4 Phantom. That plane crash-landed in the Mediterranean after veering into Syrian airspace. In response, an outraged Erdogan lambasted the Syrian military for acting in haste.*"A short-term border violation can never be a pretext for an attack," he told Parliament at the time.'*

http://sputniknews.com/military/20151125/1030698044/erdogan-airspace-violation-contradiction.html


I wonder how many times Turkey has overflown Syria's border as they attack the Kurds who are one of the few groups that are effectively fighting ISIS in Syria and northern Iraq?   http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/10/turkey-attacks-kurdish-fighters-syria-151027082432729.html


My question here is, when will the world quit just accepting as gospel, anything and everything that comes out of 'the coalition'.  Those people have as much reason to lie as anyone else, including Russia.  What you have to do is follow the rhetoric from the start, observe the actions of the parties involved and follow the money (who is funding ISIS) and look to see who would benefit from the departure of Assad.  It is a mistake to look at each incident in isolation which is what we are encouraged to do by the invested parties.  Those 'parties' are counting on apathy and lousy memories among the public.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 25, 2015)

Debby said:


> And George Bush Senior was head of the CIA and we all know what they are capable of.  The word 'torture' pops into my mind whereas Putin was a paper pusher and recruiter of informants.   So which leopard would you like to discuss?  The one who got told what to do by his bosses, or one who was a boss?



Geez Debby..  can you never debate Russia and Putin WITHOUT slamming the USA    It's like neener neener neener... YOU did it too..


----------



## BobF (Nov 25, 2015)

Not George Bush Senior was it?    I thought it was George Bush the second that was accused of torture.    Accused but never held to the charges.   If what we hear in the US, it was only three  persons, all still here on earth.   At that time the water board was considered OK in the US.   With Obama he declared it to be wrong.   Hard to hang someone doing what was considered OK at the time.


----------



## Jackie22 (Nov 25, 2015)

I read that too, Debby, kinda puts a different light on it.  The article I read implied Turkey was buying the ISIS oil...???


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Geez Debby..  can you never debate Russia and Putin WITHOUT slamming the USA    It's like neener neener neener... YOU did it too..




Well, seeing as how America is involved everywhere and for decades past, your own government has made that very difficult to do QS.  And if you equate relaying FACTS with slamming, then that's your problem isn't it.  And as I've told you repeatedly, I am completely aware of my own countries failings as they have occurred and am willing to 'own them' and discuss them.  

When your government begins to behave and learns to cooperate, they will remove fodder for discussions of this sort.   Really, it's up to them.


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

BobF said:


> Not George Bush Senior was it?    I thought it was George Bush the second that was accused of torture.    Accused but never held to the charges.   If what we hear in the US, it was only three  persons, all still here on earth.   At that time the water board was considered OK in the US.   With Obama he declared it to be wrong.   Hard to hang someone doing what was considered OK at the time.




Maybe you didn't see the reason I brought Bush into the discussion?    I never said GB senior ordered torture (although the CIA was probably doing it then too).  I simply pointed out to Laurie that using the 'Putin was KGB' is a non-starter as an argument for his so-called 'monstrousness', because GB was head of the CIA at one point in his career.  AND that Putin wasn't even a Director as was Bush.

Again, look at the history of Putin, what HE has done and said and how HE has behaved in the face of continual aggression and accusations.

And if your last line were to be fairly applied, then it seems that you'd all have to quit levelling accusations against Putin for his time in the KGB.   KGB=CIA


----------



## BobF (Nov 25, 2015)

Disagree.    KGB does not equal to CIA.   As far as I know the KGB was very fierce and would damage folks while arresting them and further damage in the holding places.    Not the same for the CIA as far as I know.   From what we heard in the US was that certain uncooperative persons would be sent somewhere in Europe or middle east for a period.   When they wanted to come back to the US, or Canada, it was understood they were willing to reveal.   As was visible to the citizens of the US was that all activities were pre approved before enacting.   Right or wrong depends on who is reading the events.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 25, 2015)

Debby said:


> Well, seeing as how America is involved everywhere and for decades past, your own government has made that very difficult to do QS.  And if you equate relaying FACTS with slamming, then that's your problem isn't it.  And as I've told you repeatedly, I am completely aware of my own countries failings as they have occurred and am willing to 'own them' and discuss them.
> 
> When your government begins to behave and learns to cooperate, they will remove fodder for discussions of this sort.   Really, it's up to them.




What did bringing up the Bush was in the CIA have to do with anything?  You just love to do that... That's ok  Debby...  I know your feelings about my country.  So does everyone here..


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 25, 2015)

When is torture ever the right thing to do? Besides the obvious inhumanity, it is not reliable source of obtaining information. Just because some individuals in a country endorse it's use, does not make it acceptable.


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

BobF said:


> Disagree.    KGB does not equal to CIA.   As far as I know the KGB was very fierce and would damage folks while arresting them and further damage in the holding places.    Not the same for the CIA as far as I know.   From what we heard in the US was that certain uncooperative persons would be sent somewhere in Europe or middle east for a period.   When they wanted to come back to the US, or Canada, it was understood they were willing to reveal.   As was visible to the citizens of the US was that all activities were pre approved before enacting.   Right or wrong depends on who is reading the events.




Well, you have a right to your own opinion but my understanding of the CIA is that where they didn't directly 'attack' American citizens, their 'mercies' in other countries weren't tender by any means.  Perhaps the main difference is their actions to change governments and frequently at the cost of the civilians of other nations.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/a-timeline-of-cia-atrocities/5348804

'....The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes, purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, ****** intrigue, false stories about opponents in the local media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military _coup_, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using interrogation, torture and murder.......This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special school, the notorious “School of the Americas.” (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the “School of the Dictators” and “School of the Assassins.” Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, including the use of interrogation, torture and murder.The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6 million people had died as a result of CIA covert operations. (2) Former State Department official William Blum correctly calls this an “American Holocaust.”.....'

So does training someone to use the same tactics as used by the KGB not equate in your book?   That is what the world knows of your CIA and it's not so different in my opinion.  Lot of pot calling the kettle black.

What's more, the KGB was Soviet Union and we're discussing Russia and they are two different governments.


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> What did bringing up the Bush was in the CIA have to do with anything?  You just love to do that... That's ok  Debby...  I know your feelings about my country.  So does everyone here..





Well when 'your' side ceases bringing up Putins time in the KGB (as a paper-pusher and someone who brings in informants) as being indicative of his being a monster today, I'll quit bringing up Bush senior's time as the Director of the CIA.  

And QS, I've had the opportunity to meet lots of nice folks in the US and my husband even counts a few as close friends having travelled by motorcycle with a group of Americans throughout the North West and the mid-west area.  My beef is only and always with your government and the things that your government has done in it's obvious push to control and have influence over other governments,  and what it does all over the world in what many in the world are calling American Imperialism.  

I'm also fully cognizant of the multitude of great things that have come out of the US and how much the world owes brilliant Americans for their inventions and discoveries.  So you would be entirely wrong in suggesting that my feelings are entirely negative, but I refuse to call evil good and good evil.  Doesn't matter what side of the border you're on.


----------



## Debby (Nov 25, 2015)

You know what all you American friends here...I understand exactly how you feel when I say these things, anger, hurt, embarrassment....when I found out my government was involved in the overthrow of the elected President of Haiti in 2004, I felt all those things too and I was glad that I discovered it through my own research and didn't have to endure having someone 'throw' it at me.  It gave me time to come to grips with the realization that the 'government' that I'd sort of grown up with wasn't at all as good as I'd always thought it was.  It was a sensation like eating most of the way through a good meal only to realize that there's a dead mouse at the bottom of the bowl.  I get it.

But I've also found that there's something very freeing about accepting that that's what happened but it can be changed, maybe.    In this day and age of growing climate concern, we HAD a Prime Minister who slashed our environmental protections, muzzled our federal climate scientists and then I think, simply got rid of lots of them and felt cocky enough to tell your country, 'I won't take no for an answer', on the Keystone pipeline.  I can still be patriotic and love my country even while I say, that guy was all wrong, the way Canada was going is wrong and push for change vying communicating and voting.

So really, I'm not out to make anybody feel bad for the sake of feeling bad.  But nothing changes if you don't talk about it.  And I'd like to imagine a world that maybe in 75 years when our grandkids are sitting with grandkids at their knees, they might just be living in a world that has figured out all the 'stuff' we're going through now and learned how to do better.   And only discussion has a hope of bringing that about.


Also, sorry about the triple post (that's really not acceptable I know, but I thought someone else would have posted something in the time I was writing mine) and I just hit send before I checked.  Sorry, I'll be quiet now


----------



## BobF (Nov 25, 2015)

And things not mentioned are the many things the US does outside the UN.   We get it done faster, more completely, more directly, than the UN has ever managed to do.   

Even been some talked here about abandoning the UN and have a real friendly group arranged that was not tied up to only a few ideas.   Those thoughts do come up and then get forgotten but come back again.   

You seem to think we are way too aggressive?   Doesn't make sense at all.    The US was not into world advantages much till after WWII and we stayed in Europe since.   By request for many of those countries.   We stayed with France, UK, China, Russia.  Now China is a modified, capitalistic type, of Communism.   Russia has apparently given up on Communism and gone into some form of socialism.   Today, under Obama, we have pretty much given up on any military efforts for the UN or ourselves.    Mostly just occasionally a driven robot that watches folks and occasionally drops a bomb or two.   I hope our next President is a bit more active in how the rest of the world operates, together, if possible.   

Right now Canada should be pretty proud of the US next door.   If we were not here watching your border there is little left in Canada to stop some one from invading and taking over.   We are trying to stop this invasion from the south, people from all over the world coming through, but our current government is not working hard at stopping any of it.   More in the idea of IF they come through the border patrol will catch them miles away in the cities and towns.   Many we do and many we don't.   The border patrol should be on the border and stopping all these illegal invasions from happening.   This is where Canada gets its few that sneak in and then move to a Canadian border point.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 25, 2015)

The definition of a delusion is a fixed and false belief.  

Immigration across our Southern border is now NET NEGATIVE..   In other words.. More Hispanics are leaving the US than are entering..  

http://www.rttnews.com/2583178/mexi...mmigration-into-u-s-turns-negative-study.aspx


More Mexicans are now found leaving the U.S. than having migrated here since the end of the Great Recession, according to the findings of a study published Thursday. 
A new Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from both countries showed that the desire to reunite with families was the main reason behind the trend. The sluggish U.S. economic recovery and tougher border enforcement are the other key factors. 




The study also showed that the overall flow of Mexican immigrants between the two countries is at its smallest since the 1990s, mostly due to a drop in the number of Mexican immigrants.


----------



## Fern (Nov 25, 2015)

Oh lord you people, the thread is not about the US & Russia it's Russia & TURKEY.
 Shooting one of the pilots before he hits the ground, as was the case, is absolutely disgusting.


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 25, 2015)

Bob, we have a border patrol also. We are not incompetent. Nor are we helpless vassals of the most powerful country in the world, pathetically grateful for it's protection. Geez. It benefits America also if no one invades us--for obvious reasons.


----------



## Shalimar (Nov 25, 2015)

Fern we are off track. Lol. Re shooting the pilot, unnacceptable.


----------



## Laurie (Nov 25, 2015)

> "The one who got told what to do by his bosses, or one who was a boss?"



The one who is in charge of one of the biggest nuclear arsenals in the world, not yesterday's man, the toothless old one whose teeth have been drawn.


----------



## BobF (Nov 25, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> The definition of a delusion is a fixed and false belief.
> 
> Immigration across our Southern border is now NET NEGATIVE..   In other words.. More Hispanics are leaving the US than are entering..
> 
> ...



This must be net as I live near a border center and they are busy as can be.   We recently had a train load of people walk through our border as they are not allowed to block the border as they were a few years back.   We actually need more fences and more on the border.   Once they get through it is tough to find and catch them.   But for that trainload that came through the fence and then sat down waiting to be picked up and brought into the state.   Now we are getting told we are holding those women and children too long and must get them some place.    Another government agency arguing against the holding group that wants to screen them all before leaving the go on or get sent back to where ever.   

Not long back I posted about the many drug runners north of where I live, walking at night, getting spotted, some caught and some got away.    This is likely about 200 miles from the border.   How many hours were they walking at night carrying big back packs of drug.   Finally caught them but a good border patrol on the actual border would be more precise for sure.   All this net less means nothing but those stranded here with no work are finally going home as many more are already here and more arriving all the time.


----------



## Laurie (Nov 25, 2015)

> "Shooting one of the pilots before he hits the ground, as was the case, is absolutely disgusting."



Rubbish.  It depends on the circumstances.  If the pilot is headed for your territory, OK, he's heading for capture.

However, if he's heading for his own territory he is still a combatant who may be back in the air soon, killing your comrades, and is a legitimate target.

There was at least one documented case during the Battle of Britain where a downed British pilot was back in the air later the same day and shot down a German raider.


----------



## imp (Nov 25, 2015)

FWIW, revealed publicly decades later, sometime in the late '70s, CIA operatives intentionally derailed a passenger train in France, I believe it was, in an attempt to assassinate a tyrant king traveling with his entourage. Many folks were killed in this unscrupulous "accident". 

The intended victim was not on board. 

Ya'd think they'd at least do enough checking to have determined he changed his plans!   imp


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 25, 2015)

Conflicting accounts from  Russia and Turkey... 

The Turks have produced audio of exchanges between themselves and the Russian plane and tracking data.
The Russians have produced a live pilot that they claim to have rescued from the ground near the downed aircraft.
He denies ever receiving a warning and says the plane was never in Turkish airspace.

My gut feeling is to believe the Turks.

It is too soon after the downed Malaysian plane over Ukrainian airspace to readily accept any denials by Putin.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 25, 2015)

These are the conflicting claims of the Russians and the Turks.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-...recording-warning-sent-to-russian-jet/6976156


----------



## Laurie (Nov 26, 2015)

> "Conflicting accounts from Russia and Turkey... "



Well, well.  Whoever would have thought so!


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 26, 2015)

Laurie said:


> "Conflicting accounts from Russia and Turkey... "
> 
> Well, well.  Whoever would have thought so!



Never..... it's unfathomable.


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Conflicting accounts from  Russia and Turkey...
> 
> The Turks have produced audio of exchanges between themselves and the Russian plane and tracking data.
> The Russians have produced a live pilot that they claim to have rescued from the ground near the downed aircraft.
> ...




Does your gut feeling change when you consider that there are now allegations being made that Erdogun's son is in the business of transporting oil for ISIS to ports all over the world?
Might that explain the slowness in Turkey's involvement in 'fighting ISIS' or their inclination to go after the Kurds (who are apparently rather excellent at fighting ISIS on the ground)?  Or that his daughter is in charge of a hospital facility that patches up ISIS fighters so that they can resume fighting?

And any thoughts on why the public has never heard whatever was on Flight MH17's black box recordings or the last moments of communication between that flight and air traffic control?  I was reading a GlobalResearch article and there are issues that have never been answered.  Like why was that plane diverted from it's safe flight path to send it over top of a war zone.  Or why the Ukraine Security Service confiscated all communications between the plane and the air traffic controllers.....and the public has never heard what was on them?  Crucial evidence that no one has heard?  Why not?  The link also brings up that Kiev ordered that plane to drop from 36,000 feet (above the clouds) to 33,000 feet below the clouds, but we've never gotten to hear why they did that either.

The article goes on to point out that Russia released all available satellite imagery (all dated and time stamped) of that moment as a sign of transparency, showed it on live broadcast and then turned it all over to the agencies purported to be investigating.  The conclusion portion of the article also mentions clear satellite imagery that proves that the day prior, Ukraine's military had moved the same type of anti-aircraft Buk missile launchers into a position not far from Donbass and in the region where the plane was shot down.  

'...According to clear satellite images provided, on July 16th, *the Ukrainian Army positioned 3-4 anti-aircraft BUK M1 SAM missile batteries close to Donetsk*. These systems included full launching, loading and radio location units, located in the immediate vicinity of the MH17 crash site. One system was placed approximately 8km northwest of Lugansk. In addition, a radio location system for these Ukrainian Army missile batteries is situated 5km north of Donetsk. On July 17th, the day of the incident, these batteries were moved to a position 8km south of *Shahktyorsk*. In addition to this, two other radio location units are also identified in the immediate vicinity. These SAM systems had a range of 35km distance, and 25km altitude. From July 18th, after the downing of MH17, Kiev’s BUK launchers were then moved away from the firing zone....'

And further to that point, why would Ukraine be moving anti-aircraft Buks to that region when the rebels don't have planes?

The point to all of this is, we have been fed lots of propaganda (because that's what governments do and especially in times of war) that makes only Russia look bad.  But having read a great deal about these situations, not to mention all the reading that I've done about Putin and numerous of his speeches, I have learned one thing and that is, go beyond the mainstream media for your information and question your 'gut feeling' always.



http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-25/meet-man-who-funds-isis-bilal-erdogan-son-turkeys-president

http://www.globalresearch.ca/mh17-one-year-on-what-really-happened-and-why/5463625


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

BobF said:


> .......
> You seem to think we are way too aggressive?   Doesn't make sense at all.    The US was not into world advantages much till after WWII and we stayed in Europe since.   By request for many of those countries.   We stayed with France, UK, China, Russia.  Now China is a modified, capitalistic type, of Communism.   Russia has apparently given up on Communism and gone into some form of socialism.   Today, under Obama, we have pretty much given up on any military efforts for the UN or ourselves.    Mostly just occasionally a driven robot that watches folks and occasionally drops a bomb or two.   I hope our next President is a bit more active in how the rest of the world operates, together, if possible.
> ........




The evidence is overwhelming that the US is an aggressive nation so it's not a question as to whether I think that or not.  I do think it's interesting how you characterize and minimize the efforts of your government in it's various conflicts. '...occasionally a driven robot that watches folks and occasionally drops a bomb or two....'  Drone whistleblowers don't apparently feel that what's going on in their department is nearly as benign as you seem to believe. Four ex-drone operators have gone on record saying the following:

'

_*'The killings, part of the Obama administration’s targeted assassination program, are aiding terrorist recruitment and thus undermining the program’s goal of eliminating such fighters, the veterans added. Drone operators refer to children as “fun-size terrorists” and liken killing them to “cutting the grass before it grows too long,” said one of the operators, Michael Haas, a former senior airman in the Air Force. Haas also described widespread drug and alcohol abuse, further stating that some operators had flown missions while impaired.**....'*_

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ten-high-drugs-refer-kids-fun-size-terrorists

The Israeli's also refer to their periodic attacks on Gaza as 'cutting the grass' .

Just because Obama isn't visibly banging war drums doesn't mean to say that the administration has mended it's ways and habits developed over the last 25 years.  Developed more subtle methods of coercion perhaps that are not so visible to the public because the appetite for all out war is changing, but the result seems to be the same, i.e. the killing and displacement of millions of innocent people who's needs aren't even in the picture when it comes to 'the agenda' and a continuing need to engage because the 'enemies' never seem to go away.


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

Laurie said:


> "Shooting one of the pilots before he hits the ground, as was the case, is absolutely disgusting."
> 
> Rubbish.  It depends on the circumstances.  If the pilot is headed for your territory, OK, he's heading for capture.
> 
> ...



Rubbish????  The Geneva Convention specifically prohibits shooting at pilots who are parachuting down out of a destroyed plane.   Maybe we should just toss out the entire Geneva Convention.

The Hague convention states:  “In the event of an aircraft being disabled, the persons trying to escape by means of parachutes must not be attacked during their descent.”






Argentina's War Manual states:  It is prohibited … to attack persons bailing out with parachutes from an aircraft in distress … When reaching the ground, they must be offered the opportunity to surrender before being attacked, unless they commit hostile acts. This rule does not apply to airborne troops

Australia's Commanders Guide:  Parachutists are defined as those who abandon a disabled aircraft. Parachutists are not legitimate military targets … It is appreciated that it may be difficult to distinguish a parachutist from a paratrooper, especially while in the air.



Aircrew who have baled out of a damaged aircraft are to be considered as _hors de combat_ and should not be attacked during their descent. However, should the parachutist land in enemy territory he must be given an opportunity to surrender



   Even America's own manuals differentiate between a paratrooper dropping behind enemy lines to commit an act of war and a parachutist escaping from a destroyed plane.  

'Parachutists descending from disabled aircraft may not be attacked while in the air unless they engage in combatant acts while descending. Upon reaching the ground, such parachutists must be provided an opportunity to surrender.'

https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule48


----------



## BobF (Nov 26, 2015)

Debby said:


> BobF said:
> 
> 
> > .......
> ...


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

Oh my gosh yes Bob.  What the world really needs is a real WAR PRESIDENT!  Damn straight!  More bombs, more death and done openly and without shame right!  And orders for the CIA to be more careful about hiding what they do and have done right?



And for you Laurie, I'll quit bringing up 'that old toothless guy who was, when in his prime, Director of one of the world's most dangerous organizations' when people quit bringing up Putin's early years as a paper pusher/informant finder for the KGB.  How's that for an agreement?


----------



## BobF (Nov 26, 2015)

A number of these wars you claim the US must have started were actually responding to UN requests for help.   Why not slam the UN then.

One in Afghanistan was asked for from the UN and permission was gotten to go and find the one that organized the downing of two towers in the US. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

Was our engagement in *Korea* wrong?   Then tell the UN.    There were 16 nations involved.
*Gulf War*, a total of 14 nations helping the UN get Iraq back in line.    Go tell the UN.
*No Fly Zone*.   A number of nations, eight, joined to make that point.   Some considered that still part of the UN help.
*Somali Civil War*.   A total of 15 nations supporting this UN item.   Go tell the UN.
*Bosnian War*.   Again there were many countries involved, at total of 18.   This time for NATO.   Maybe, tell NATO will do.
*Kosovo War*, Part of Yugoslavia wars.   This time the country count was 21 nations.   Not sure who organized that idea.
*Afghanistan *war.   A very involved situation with 30 nations total involved.    Osama bin Laden killed after Obama took over.  Still going on. Point to  NATO.
*Iraq* war.   Fifteen nations included.    It was considered a extension of the earlier UN efforts at that time.   Since then there are those that said not true.    Best take that up with Gen Sir Michael Jackson of UK.
*War in north west Pakistan*.   US and Pakistan together.   US drone strikes and Pakistan doing others.   On going.
*War on ISIL* with 27 countries involved.   Ongoing.

All these hateful wars started by runaway religions.   I hope the way the US is designed that we will never have that problem.


----------



## tnthomas (Nov 26, 2015)

Debby said:


> Well, seeing as how America is involved everywhere and for decades past, your own government has made that very difficult to do QS.  And if you equate relaying FACTS with slamming, then that's your problem isn't it.  And as I've told you repeatedly, I am completely aware of my own countries failings as they have occurred and am willing to 'own them' and discuss them.
> 
> When your government begins to behave and learns to cooperate, they will remove fodder for discussions of this sort.   Really, it's up to them.




The U.S. is in a position of leadership, not "followership" and as such is involved in setting the agenda along with the other major power-players in the World.   The U.S.  _absolutely_ does co-operate with other nations on a great many matters of benefit to the world.

Talk is cheap, so if the U.S' actions become fodder for discussions, I don't think that anyone on Capitol Hill will really lose any sleep...


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

BobF said:


> A number of these wars you claim the US must have started were actually responding to UN requests for help.   Why not slam the UN then.
> 
> One in Afghanistan was asked for from the UN and permission was gotten to go and find the one that organized the downing of two towers in the US.
> 
> ...




Considering that the US is the largest country in the world, has the largest military, spends more money than anyone else on military and has one of only a handful of veto's in the UN, would we be remiss to consider the possibility that the USA has a major influence on any and all decisions that even the UN and NATO makes?  Keep in mind that three of those with veto power are also members of NATO.

In each and every one of the above, the USA had a primary, personal reason for declaring war in those regions and I'm not disputing that others were involved in them, but, my above point still stands.  American influence is hard to ignore.  

I'm not an idiot Bob and I do realize that there are instances in this world where it is necessary for powerful countries to help small countries or groups in their struggle against bullies who attempt to over ride their personal rights, but the American administration has demonstrated in various instances, that their 'help' always comes at a price and that often other governments are over-ruled, manipulated, put in place to be puppet governments, etc., and that the CIA is the tool of those efforts and when it suits, monsters will be overlooked because they happen to suit the American agenda while others will be scapegoated.  

If all the conflicts were with a view to 'spreading democracy' and 'preventing atrocities' as America so often likes to claim, why do the Saudi's get a pass?  Or the Israeli's?  Why is it okay for your government to support neo-Nazi rioters who burn people alive, in Ukraine and the eventual coup that takes out a democratically elected government and then sanctions Russia, because the Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia?  

And last but not least, why, if the desire of America is to defeat ISIS and protect the world from runaway terrorism, are they supporting al Qaeda affiliates(remember the Towers) with weapons and money and training in Syria and not gong after ISIS finances and oil revenue?


----------



## BobF (Nov 26, 2015)

I sure don't know what has happened to your personality as you seem to be very negative in far too many things.   Even with evidence that you are stretching things you remain defiant and hostile to others posts.   If you don't like what others are posting the best way is to ignore it and move on.   No need for these put downs on other poster either.

For me, I am through with responding to your posts any more.   You are just not worth the time and effort just to read more of your hate and finger pointing.   I stopped before and for some reason I changed my mind.   No more.   Maybe some others should also ignore your hateful posts too.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 26, 2015)

Debbie I don't have time now to look into all of these points now but a couple of points have jumped out at me

I've only looked at the first link so far and I have clicked on the author's name. It goes nowhere because it says I don't have permission to access that information. If I can't know something about the author then I don't place too much weight on the writing.

Second, we did get a lot of coverage of the downed Malaysian Airlines plane over here and I have some quibbles with these statements:



> And any thoughts on why the public has never heard whatever was on Flight MH17's black box recordings or the last moments of communication between that flight and air traffic control?  I was reading a GlobalResearch article and there are issues that have never been answered.  Like why was that plane diverted from it's safe flight path to send it over top of a war zone.  Or why the Ukraine Security Service confiscated all communications between the plane and the air traffic controllers.....and the public has never heard what was on them?  Crucial evidence that no one has heard?  Why not?  The link also brings up that Kiev ordered that plane to drop from 36,000 feet (above the clouds) to 33,000 feet below the clouds, but we've never gotten to hear why they did that either.


I don't remember hearing what was on the flight recorder but I do remember hearing that MH17 was not the only airline using a flight path over the war zone and that the height was perfectly normal, and well above the level necessary to avoid the kind of weaponry that the rebels could have been expected to have. Buk ground to air missiles were a nasty surprise.


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

BobF said:


> I sure don't know what has happened ................




Well, having an overactive sense of humour is not an accusation that I’ve ever heard, to start with Bob.  I guess I would describe my personality as such that the serious things of life give me a lot of emotional pain and I speak out about it.  


I have a silly notion that we all deserve a peaceful world that we all love and take care of, realizing what a precious jewel it all is and the reading that I do proves the point that we humans as a whole, are willing to overlook those things in pursuit of personal gains and agendas.  It bothers me so I talk about it.


If you don’t want to read what I write, then I’m sorry for that, because I think we can never know too much about what is being done in ‘our’ names.


I also don’t lie or exaggerate or name call or put down other people.  If you'd read any of the links that I provide from credible sources, you'd have noticed that what I am saying is pretty much supported by the people that I'm quoting or quoting from.  We all have different perspectives which results in different opinions.  I can’t force you to accept mine, but I think your Constitution would suggest that in a democracy, we have the right to voice those opinions and share information to support them.



As for you not engaging in discussion any more with me, well that’s too bad but it’s your decision.  I hope you have a nice evening anyway.


----------



## BobF (Nov 26, 2015)

One last comment to you.   Being ready to defend our lifestyles from over run is not being war minded.   The action is called self defense and it is needed more and more in this now crazy world.   You claim you do not put others down but when you tell people they are not thinking correctly or what ever, you are putting them down.   You do it more than a little bit too.   But of course, you are never wrong, ever.


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> Debbie I don't have time now to look into all of these points now but a couple of points have jumped out at me
> 
> I've only looked at the first link so far and I have clicked on the author's name. It goes nowhere because it says I don't have permission to access that information. If I can't know something about the author then I don't place too much weight on the writing.
> 
> ...




Hello Dame Warrigal,

Re:  Tyler Durden on that first link, I believe that’s a pseudonym that the owner of the site uses but if you read down the article, you’ll notice that it is written by a man named F. William Engdahl.  All of the articles on this site are written by various people.   But I understand what you mean about not knowing an author.  I often make a point of checking things like that too.  Like who runs a web site or has written an article and what kind of credentials they might have.  Wikipedia is good for that.


Not positive but I believe the name Tyler Durden may have been chosen from that movie Fight Club.  It was the name of the character played by Brad Pitt I think and if you’ll recall from the movie, he was some sort of ‘ghost’ in the life of the other character.


According to the article, the communications have never been released and I follow this sort of thing daily and I haven’t heard any mention personally.  And if you read the link, it can much better explain how they believe changes in flight path actually happened and also the changes in altitude that apparently occurred.


The reason that I pursued this old story at all is simply to remind everyone, and I’ll say it again, that we need to check all sources of information on the numerous conflicts around the world, because every government is fully proficient at disseminating propaganda (yes even Putin ) and one of the ways they do that is to use our news networks.  They have their press conferences and they tell us what they’ve decided we should know.  I say question, question, question.


I’ve seen several specific instances where the news we hear, is not the real story or so badly skewed that your opinion changes the minute you hear the whole story or the other side.  So question everything.


And now, I'm going to give myself a time out (which should delight Bob) and I'm going to focus on something lighter.  Maybe I'll even get my embroidery art finished!  

(pssst - think I can stay away ?)


----------



## Laurie (Nov 26, 2015)

Debby said:


> Rubbish????  The Geneva Convention specifically prohibits shooting at pilots who are parachuting down out of a destroyed plane.   Maybe we should just toss out the entire Geneva Convention.
> 
> The Hague convention states:  “In the event of an aircraft being disabled, the persons trying to escape by means of parachutes must not be attacked during their descent.”
> 
> ...



Sorry, don't agree.

These conventions are rooted in the past "Gentlemen of the French army, be pleased to fire first".  Such chivalrous ideas have no place in modern total warfare.

 A pilot who has lost his plane is no different to a soldier who has lost his rifle.  They are legitimate combatants who may be rearmed and if there is Any chance of them doing so, i.e. behind their own lines they must be disabled, ideally wounded not killed.  Wounded need care.

Would you say a tank crew should not be attacked once they have abandoned their tank, a  missile crew inviolate once they have abandoned their launcher?

Survivors at sea are different, the sea is a common enemy to all mariners.

I might further point out that this was a Russian plane, shot down by Turkey.  Like the USA they do not subscribe to the Geneva Convention, which itself has nit been revised since 1949.

If you're going to fight a war, fight the damned thing, don't pussyfoot around.

For the record I was protected from a German machine gunner as a two year old by my seven tear old brother throwing himself on top of me.  I have met, and drunk with, several German machine gunners, of a relevant age,  since.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 26, 2015)

BobF said:


> One last comment to you.   Being ready to defend our lifestyles from over run is not being war minded.   The action is called self defense and it is needed more and more in this now crazy world.   You claim you do not put others down but when you tell people they are not thinking correctly or what ever, you are putting them down.   You do it more than a little bit too.   But of course, you are never wrong, ever.



If the US military was for self defence only it wouldn't be as immense as it is and deployed in so many countries so far from its borders. Rather than self defence, it's primary purpose could be described as protection of self interest.


----------



## Warrigal (Nov 26, 2015)

Debbie, I am fully aware that truth is  the first casualty of war. And during peace time it is pretty badly mauled too.

As in a court room drama it is necessary to cast an eye over the available evidence and try to determine which side is most likely to be telling the truth and which side is covering it up.

Until further evidence comes to light, I reckon the Turks are more likely to be telling the truth about the Russian plane crossing the border after being warned not to.


----------



## BobF (Nov 27, 2015)

Warrigal said:


> If the US military was for self defence only it wouldn't be as immense as it is and deployed in so many countries so far from its borders. Rather than self defence, it's primary purpose could be described as protection of self interest.



Since WWII, we have had countries once held by Russia or overrun by Germany ask for the US to stay around and help protect them.    We did so where we were asked.   We have such arrangements in the Pacific also and I believe Australia is part of that defense area.   If a country wished the US to leave they only have to make it an official statement and then we leave.   The Philippines is a good example of that movement.    The US has not taken over any lands since firming our own borders.   We have accepted Hawaii and Alaska as states after several years of requesting.   Puerto Rico keeps asking but for some reason it just has not happened.   

The US is not on an expansion drive at all.   But we also would like to keep troubles in Europe in Europe.    So to me it is a helpful and defensive move of ours to try to keep our friends around the world free of not so friendly governments where ever.

Look to what has happened with our recent experiences in the Iraq and Iran area.   We, with many other countries, worked to free Iraq of a terrible dictator.   After they developed their own government we were told to leave.   Then Iran, who hates the US for one, came over and spoiled the government the Iraq folks had put together and things started to go to pot immediately.   We, the freeing forces, should have demanded that we stay for several years as we did with Japan and Germany and Italy after WWII.   There might now still be peace in that area rather than these radical and nasty killer groups.  It is defensive actions we need and must use to avoid a real world war three.


----------

