Recap on NATO shooting down a Russian jet and murdering the pilot

A Russian Jet that was flying over Syria at the invitation and with the permission of the Syrian government was bombing Turks in Syria. While bombing Turks in Syria, was shot down by Turkey, which is part of NATO. Allegedly the jet strayed slightly inside Turkey, but it was shot down over Syria, the wreckage landed inside Syria, the pilots landed inside Syria, and the pilots were murdered inside Syria. We know it was shot down over Syria because of video uploaded by the Turks who murdered one of the pilots. Although Turkey says it was flying inside Turkish airspace, it was shot down in a Turkish no fly zone over Syria.

The pilots parachuted safely and were promptly murdered, by an organization that is theoretically an enemy of the US, but which in Syria is receiving backing and arms from the US and is composed of people who are ethnically Turks operating on the border of NATO ally Turkey with the protection of Turkey. The killers videotape themselves shooting the pilot endlessly while chanting “Allah Akbar” and upload the video to the internet.

Obama and the US enthusiastically backs Turkey, as Turkey makes war on Christians.

Obama says Turkey has the right to defend itself and its airspace. It certainly has the right to defend its airspace by shooting Russians in Turkish airspace. Does not follow that it has the right to defend its airspace by shooting Russians in Syria. The plane was shot down while bombing Turks in Syria. Hard for it to intrude on Turkish airspace while its bombs are landing where they are supposed to.

Will this incident lead to World War III? Probably not. But this kind of stupidity and recklessness will lead to World War III. It has been a long time since the last big war, so people are forgetting that peace is hard, war is easy. If we don’t get World War III this time over Syria, we will get it next time over someplace else, or the time after that. I am still inclined to bet on Civil War II rather than World War III, because the American elite is increasingly disloyal and incohesive.

141 Responses to “Recap on NATO shooting down a Russian jet and murdering the pilot”

  1. Noel says:

    “With the permission of the Syrian government.” Are you sure that the Assad government approved the taking down of a Russian jet, one of its most steadfast allies?

  2. Mike says:

    In Russia, before thanksgiving, turkey shoots you.

  3. Alan J. Perrick says:

    If it’s going to be a proper Civil War, then the people doing the seceding need to keep in mind that the purpose is to take the enemy’s capital city not merely to repel the federal state’s operatives in their own, our own, base.

    I hope Syria doesn’t shoot anymore Russians, but then again they are a little divided on the issue! Why is this international news? Why is Turkey in N.A.T.O.? The programme of White Genocide explains both of these questions. It’s a distraction from the problems at home and N.A.T.O. membership for Turkey means that Turks can more easily enter white countries and racially intermarry with the whites for said programme.

    Diversity means chasing down the last white person, it’s a code word for White Genocide.

    A.J.P.

    • Corvinus says:

      “Diversity means chasing down the last white person, it’s a code word for White
      Genocide.”

      See, let me show you how easy it is to make up meaningless memes–Pro-race is code word for anti-humanity.

      • Alan J. Perrick says:

        ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, BUT WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY?!!

        That’s genocide!

        Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

        • Corvinus says:

          Well, Europeans conquered the world and brought home with them different peoples as laborers. Did they not have the liberty to make those decisions for themselves at that point in time?

          Moreover, America was never an exclusively “white” country.

          Furthermore, “Asian” and “African” are generic terms. You do realize that those continents have a wide range of people, correct?

          Now…

          Define “white”.

          Define “anti-white”.

          Do “whites” have the liberty to think for themselves? Are they able to implement the time honored tradition of “freedom of association”?

          Do “whites” have the liberty to marry and procreate with whomever they choose?

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “Corvinus”,

            Why are you so anti-white?

            A.J.P.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Why are you so anti-white?”

            Are you that intellectually stunted that you are unable to respond to my dialectic inquiry? See, your rhetoric personifies impotence, which is nearly on the same level as Mark Citadel.

            The train is fine, A.J.P. The train is fine.

          • Mark Citadel says:

            Corvinus hits two birds with one stone. being pro-white genocide and being highly autistic

          • Corvinus says:

            Mark, are YOU that intellectually stunted that you are unable to respond to my dialectic inquiry?

            The train is fine, Mark, the train is fine.

          • peppermint says:

            Do “whites” have the liberty to think for themselves? Are they able to implement the time honored tradition of “freedom of association”?

            Let’s ask the daughter of the commandant of Auschwitz, currently jailed for the crime of saying things about historical events she was close to 70 years ago.

            Or, you know, the CEO of the company I work for, who will swear up and down that diversity is central to the business strategy or whatever.

            You retarded faggot.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Let’s ask the daughter of the commandant of Auschwitz, currently jailed for the crime of saying things about historical events she was close to 70 years ago.”

            You’re going to have to be more specific.

            Now, if you do want to talk to someone close to the situation, you should read this story.

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415618/Rudolf-Hoss-daughter-pictured-The-Auschwitz-commandants-Balenciaga-model-daughter-kept-secret-40-years.html

            “Or, you know, the CEO of the company I work for, who will swear up and down that diversity is central to the business strategy or whatever.”

            Why on earth would you subject yourself to such cuckoldry? You really should leave your job.

            The train is fine, Peppermint, the train is fine.

            “We use the term “anti-Semitic” a lot here, and I’ve never seen you jump up and down demanding precise definition of same. Why would that be?”

            Because I’m not interested in what is and what is “anti-Semitic”. But, I do you give you props for trying to have me veer off to a direction that really is not that important. I mean, da Joos are to blame for everything, right? So why even bother with defining that term.

            “Except anti-racist is really a synonym for anti-white…”

            No, not really.

            “a direct consequence of official anti-racist theory, in which (a) only whites can be racist and (b) all whites are at all times suspected racists because disparate impact.”

            a) Actually, ANYONE can be “racist”. Whites, blacks, da Joos, Native Americans.

            b) Moreover, you’ve been reading too much Ta-Nehisi Coates. Why even give him any legitimacy.

            Now, pdimov, are YOU that intellectually stunted that you are unable to respond to my dialectic inquiry?

            The train is fine, pdimov, the train is fine.

          • pdimov says:

            “Because I’m not interested in what is and what is “anti-Semitic”. But, I do you give you props for trying to have me veer off to a direction that really is not that important.”

            My point is obvious. Jews and vile anti-Semites are capable of engaging in dialog using an implicit shared understanding of the term “anti-Semite”, without demanding definitions from each other. 99% of the world’s population knows what “white” means and does not demand a definition each time the term is used. It’s just you who pretends to not comprehend.

            “Now, pdimov, are YOU that intellectually stunted that you are unable to respond to my dialectic inquiry?”

            I am not interested in your “dialectic inquiry”, because you are not posing the questions in good faith.

            The train is indeed fine.

          • pdimov says:

            “Moreover, you’ve been reading too much Ta-Nehisi Coates.”

            Are you… old, Corvinus?

            I don’t live in America and I’ve never have had actual contact with the American higher education, but from what I can infer, critical race theory, which posits what I stated, is what is presently taught in American schools and universities.

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

            So when people say that anti-racist is anti-white, they may not quite care about what you understand by “anti-racist” and “anti-white”, because your understanding of those terms is going extinct.

            As for TNC, I’ve never read a word of his, although I do know the name.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Are you…old, Corvinus”.

            Old enough to know, young enough to care.

            “I don’t live in America and I’ve never have had actual contact with the American higher education, but from what I can infer, critical race theory, which posits what I stated, is what is presently taught in American schools and universities.”

            Critical race theory is taught in SOME colleges, yes. Let the liberal and conservative egg heads chew on their philosophies.

            “So when people say that anti-racist is anti-white, they may not quite care about what you understand by “anti-racist” and “anti-white”, because your understanding of those terms is going extinct.”

            No, those terms have yet to be clearly defined.

            • jim says:

              Everyone in every university is taught that whites are evil and hateful and that males are evil and hateful. No exceptions.

          • pdimov says:

            “Old enough to know, young enough to care.”

            The reason I ask is because in my experience so far, old white Americans are the people who fail to get that you can only pretend to not see race in a white country. They take everything white for granted and don’t grasp that…

            “Nothing you love will survive without white people.” – Jared Taylor

            http://www.amren.com/news/2015/07/an-open-letter-to-cuckservatives/

            “No, those terms have yet to be clearly defined.”

            Lack of clear definition is irrelevant. If you say “red cars are dangerous and need to be banned”, we’ll understand what you mean and will not demand a clear definition of “red”. Supplying this clear definition is as hard as defining “white”, but this doesn’t impede our mutual understanding that you are anti-red-car.

            But, to make you happy, “white” is a clustering in the PCA of certain SNP DNA markers, which generally correlates with European ancestry and other traits. And “anti-white” is someone who supports policies which will make the fraction of the white population of a certain territory go down, which tends to cause the traits associated with a large (or ruling) white fraction to disappear.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Nothing you love will survive without white people.” – Jared Taylor

            Corrected for accuracy–> Nothing you love will survive without human beings.

            “Lack of clear definition is irrelevant. If you say “red cars are dangerous and need to be banned”, we’ll understand what you mean and will not demand a clear definition of “red”. Supplying this clear definition is as hard as defining “white”, but this doesn’t impede our mutual understanding that you are anti-red-car.”

            Actually, a clear definition is paramount. And red cars themselves are not dangerous, it is the person driving those vehicles in a reckless manner. Research on car colors and crash rates is sparse. In an Australian study (2007),, white vehicles were about 10 percent less likely to be in a crash during daylight hours than vehicles in lower-visibility colors such as black, blue, gray, green, red and silver.

            “And “anti-white” is someone who supports policies which will make the fraction of the white population of a certain territory go down, which tends to cause the traits associated with a large (or ruling) white fraction to disappear.”

            Assuming that those policies indeed are the root cause for white populations to decline. You are advocating that “white” in this context is a social construct, that they ultimately lose their “whiteness”, since you offered a biological definition regarding “white”. So, a person is genetically “white”, but socially “anti-white”. Interesting paradigm.

            Nativists had also declared in the 1850’s that the Irish were “not white”, as well as designating Italians in the 1890’s with that label. I could have sworn that these two ethnic groups were European. Silly me.

            It would appear that “whites” from your vantage point are unable to think for themselves, that their actions and behaviors must ALWAYS be in the interests of the group, rather than themselves. Is not this thought process totalitarian in nature?

            • jim says:

              “Nothing you love will survive without white people.” – Jared Taylor

              Corrected for accuracy–> Nothing you love will survive without human beings.

              Does anything you love survive in Zimbabwe?

          • Steve Johnson says:

            Corvinus –

            ““Lack of clear definition is irrelevant. If you say “red cars are dangerous and need to be banned”, we’ll understand what you mean and will not demand a clear definition of “red”. Supplying this clear definition is as hard as defining “white”, but this doesn’t impede our mutual understanding that you are anti-red-car.”

            Actually, a clear definition is paramount. And red cars themselves are not dangerous, it is the person driving those vehicles in a reckless manner. Research on car colors and crash rates is sparse. In an Australian study (2007),, white vehicles were about 10 percent less likely to be in a crash during daylight hours than vehicles in lower-visibility colors such as black, blue, gray, green, red and silver.”

            That was the spergiest response I’ve ever read.

          • pdimov says:

            “Corrected for accuracy–> Nothing you love will survive without human beings.”

            Universal humanism is one of those things that will not survive without white people.

            “It would appear that “whites” from your vantage point are unable to think for themselves, that their actions and behaviors must ALWAYS be in the interests of the group, rather than themselves.”

            The simple fact of the matter is that people who labor for their own extinction will go extinct, while those who do not will (or rather, may) not. And the universal humanist ideology of the former suicidal group will die with them.

            “Is not this thought process totalitarian in nature?”

            You can’t shame reality. Say, Sir Newton, is this gravity law of yours not totalitarian in nature? LOL WUT.

          • Corvinus says:

            “Does anything you love survive in Zimbabwe?”

            Well, I love trees. And teak and mahogany, knobthorn, msasa and baobab all survive quite well there!

            The government in Zimbabwe is corrupt, just like North Korea, just like European monarchies at various points in time, just like the federal government at key junctures. It’s because of human nature to act in that fashion. That is the reality.

            “That was the spergiest response I’ve ever read.”

            Wipe the splooge off your mouth, you’re on face time. No one needs to see that disgusting display.

            “Universal humanism is one of those things that will not survive without white people.”

            Personal opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

            The train is fine, gentlemen, the train is fine.

            • jim says:

              “Does anything you love survive in Zimbabwe?”

              The government in Zimbabwe is corrupt, just like North Korea,

              North Korea is not corrupt, but rather alarmingly sincere.

              The government of Zimbabwe is not nearly corrupt enough. The two black African countries that are doing well are Nigeria, which is roughly fifty percent owned by the Nigerian military, and fifty percent owned by the Chinese, and Botswana, which is fifty percent owned by a suspiciously fair skinned “black” royal family and fifty percent owned by a white mining company.

          • pdimov says:

            “The train is fine, gentlemen, the train is fine.”

            You don’t understand the proper use of “the train is fine”, but that’s the least of your problems.

          • Corvinus says:

            “You don’t understand the proper use of “the train is fine”.

            No, I am using the phrase in its appropriate context.

            “North Korea is not corrupt, but rather alarmingly sincere.”

            It never ceases to amaze me your level of arrogant stupidity.

            Peter 2:19 —> They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption. For whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved.

          • peppermint says:

            Nice one Corvinus. To you, corrupt, and every other negative word, means not righteous, and justice, and every other positive word, means righteous

            and righteousness means what it means in the current year, so, trans-inclusive

            thus zimbabwe and north korea are both corrupt, but niggeria is no better

        • pdimov says:

          “Define “anti-white”.”

          We use the term “anti-Semitic” a lot here, and I’ve never seen you jump up and down demanding precise definition of same. Why would that be?

          “See, let me show you how easy it is to make up meaningless memes”

          Except anti-racist is really a synonym for anti-white, a direct consequence of official anti-racist theory, in which (a) only whites can be racist and (b) all whites are at all times suspected racists because disparate impact.

  4. Irving says:

    This incident in particular will not lead to World War III. Frankly, however, I do think that Turkey would be willing to start World War III were a Syrian/Iraqi Kurdistan to be created on its borders (which, barring a world war, I consider as inevitable) and for the Assad to remain in power, as a Russian/Iranian puppet, with the Sunnis in that country and in Iraq reduced to the state that they were in previous to the rise of ISIS and the various jihadist groups, i.e. at the mercy of the Shi’ite/Alawite domination. This would represent something like a geopolitical apocalypse for the Turks and they aren’t about to sit back and let it happen without a fight.

    • Alan J. Perrick says:

      “Irving” – Turkey Day is on the Twenty-Sixth, on Thursday… Do you really think it’s a coincidence?

      A.J.P.

  5. Art says:

    How do we know from the video that the jet was shot down over Syria?

    • jim says:

      Multiple videos and eyewitness testimony. The video of the jet being shot down was taken inside Syria, and the turks who took the video say the jet was bombing them at the time.

  6. Irving says:

    By the way, I’m entirely convinced that the Turks would not have done this without America’s tacit or explicit consent, which makes this event particularly frightening. Let’s not forget that not only were the Russian pilots murdered by these American backed jihadists but, in addition, the rescue helicopter deployed by the Russians was shot down by these same jihadists with American supplied missiles.

  7. Mark Citadel says:

    Vile murder by the insane government of Turkey, backed by its western allies. Russia is now speedily getting video evidence that the jets never crossed into Turkish airspace, but this will no doubt be dismissed.

    And what will happen should things escalate? I doubt this one incident will cause WWIII, but it displays growing, spiraling stupidity and chaos, gross negligence and suicidal zeal, which will as you say bring about global conflict. Will Western countries aid Turkey in war against Russia? Turkey who openly support ISIS and allow them to operate within their borders. Just think of this:

    The West will ally itself to ISIS to go to war with the only vague representative of Christendom? What travesty! What treachery! But we know a different religion controls the West now. And yes, 80% of dumbass Western ‘Christians’ will gladly throw themselves into the grinder to help ISIS, when they should immediately launch a military coup to oust the president and pull America out of NATO now before its too late.

    This won’t happen of course, the path is set. Destiny has fated what is to come. To be honest, the Kali Yuga cannot end soon enough. It should be ensured as many leftists catch bullets as possible.

    • Irving says:

      Mark Citadel, I think its a stretch to call this an act of “vile murder” by an “insane government”. Were the Turks insane, they wouldn’t have done such a thing without first securing the agreement of America, which I’m sure they did. And in any case, it isn’t exactly a secret at this point that what Russia is trying to accomplish in Syria is directly opposed and even hostile to Turkish interests. Turkey is simply doing what any country would do when faced with a foe that is more powerful than itself, which is to try and inflict as much damage as possible on the enemy without provoking any direct retaliation.

      • peppermint says:

        No it isn’t. It is a vile murder because it is not the official position of the Turkish government to kill Russians bombing ISIS-aligned terrorists in Syria. Were that the official position of the Turkish government, it would be a mere act of war.

        Russia could immediately declare war and carve up Turkey, but the US defends Turkey, ostensibly due to an alliance from the days of communism, actually because the US has a religious devotion to Israel and will do anything the People of the Shoah ask for, and a religious affection for sand nigger terrorists and want as many as possible everywhere in the world.

        Turkey and Russia are officially at peace. It is a vile murder by Cathedral proxies, just like the rape of Rotherham was vile sex crimes by Cathedral proxies.

        Anders Breivik was right to go after the commie youth to tell the commies that neither they nor their children are any safer than he was as a kid, and, far from it, under threat from White men.

        • Irving says:

          >It is a vile murder because it is not the official position of the Turkish government

          The Turkish government has been complaining for weeks about the Russian intervention in Syria and had even threatened Russia with an action of this kind should Russia not desist from its actions. I’m totally on the side of the Russians in this conflict but lets not pretend that there isn’t a conflict and that all of this came out of nowhere.

          >Russia could immediately declare war and carve up Turkey

          Turkey has a competent military that is capable of defending Turkey from invasion, even from a Russian one. The Russians would obviously win the war but the war would exact a significant cost on them, which is why they’d never start a war with them in the first place. As for carving Turkey up, the only thing the Russians could do would be to fund the Kurdish separatists; but, in reality, Turkey could and would genocide the Kurds before allowing them the chance to secede anyway.

          >Turkey and Russia are officially at peace.

          No they aren’t. Their geopolitical aims in the Middle East are starkly incompatible and opposed to one another, and both sides know it. As well, whatever the official status of the relationship between them might be, there is probably no more anti-Russian country in the world than Turkey. Turks have hated Russians for hundreds, and their hatred for Russians is about as intense as it has been long-standing.

          • peppermint says:

            Yeah, see, if Turkey and Russia weren’t at peace, there wouldn’t be all those contracts for Putin to cancel, and if NATO hadn’t told Russia that they wouldn’t shoot down the bombers, that bomber would have had some escort fighters.

            NATO promised cooperation, shot down the bomber, and had teams of terrorists organized on the ground capable of shooting down the rescue helicopter with US-supplied heavy weapons while murdering the pilots.

            It was a backstab, and whether this is the Franz Ferdinand moment starting WWIII or NATO collapses, the murdered pilot’s name will be on the lips of every soldier when Russian tanks liberate Constantinople.

            Northern Anatolia to Russia, free city status to Constantinople and the Western and Southern coast, Crete to Greece, western inland to be some kind of ‘turkistan oblast’, eastern inland to the curds. How do you say deus vult in Russian?

          • pdimov says:

            “How do you say deus vult in Russian?”

            Бог с нами.

          • B says:

            Peppermint-

            Go top up your meds. None of that will happen.

            “Crete to Greece,” indeed. I nominate you for chief Cretan.

            • jim says:

              Peppermint’s particular shit-hits-the-fan scenario is unlikely, because any one shit-hits-the-fan scenario is unlikely. But from time to time, shit does hit the fan. War is easy. Peace is hard.

          • jay says:

            A competent military that is weakened by PKK attacks.

        • Mark Citadel says:

          I am beginning to think A.B was closer to the target than a lot of people realized, even if tactically he was foolish.

          • peppermint says:

            He hit too soon. If he had waited another few years, he would be thought of a lot differently. Same as the JCC shooter in the US. Dylan Roof chose the right target but made the mistake of doing a shooting instead of an arson attack which allowed the media to focus on the old nigger sows shot instead of the historic building attacked (the JCC shooter was, of course, attacking the Jews as a race even though he only hit Whites, who were, of course, reported as Christians as it pleases the Jews to be thought Whites with a different religion).

            Someone’s going to get it right. Won’t be me, I’m on too many watch lists, but it’ll happen. The media has been ignoring the spate of arson attacks against refugee centers and camps across Europe, which means everyone knows the race war is on.

            I’m still waiting for some Brit whose sister or daughter was raped to start slaughtering communist youth.

    • Corvinus says:

      Perhaps you can summon your minions and ensure that this “travesty” and “treachery” doesn’t reach critical mass. Are you up for this physical challenge? Or are you going to continue to be this so-called intellectual mouthpiece for neoX, even if it means demonstrating thoroughly your impotence?

  8. red says:

    This stinks of having been planned in Washington.

    • jim says:

      Initially I just assumed it was kebab being kebab, but the Washington and official press reaction does suggest planned in Washington.

      • red says:

        Yep. The shitty part is NATO and Russia had just agreed to no longer target target each other which is why the SU-24 was running without escort. That’s 2 stabs in the back from the US in less than 3 years. Good thing that the other pilot was just picked up by the SSA and not tortured to death on youtube. That should give Putin room to maneuver.

      • Brit says:

        With what end-goal, to lure Russia into a war?

        • jim says:

          Obama’s speech amounted to “We cannot let Aleppo fall into the hands of the Syrian government”

          Looks to me that America and Turkey are just doing whatever it takes moment to moment to prevent the defeat of the moderate Muslims we saw machine gunning a prisoner while crying “Allah Akbar”

          • Simon says:

            Jim, you’re sometimes too crude, bordering on disgusting, but you have insight not seen anywhere else on the web!

    • pdimov says:

      “Saboteurs” blowing up the transmission towers and leaving Crimea without electricity is no doubt a coincidence.

    • Irving says:

      Here’s what happened: Turkey panicked that NATO, or at least some of its constituent countries (mainly France, with German backing), was setting up to ally with Russia against the Washington-Jerusalem-Ankara-Riyadh/Doha backed “moderate Muslims” fighting Assad. Thus it decided, likely with Washington’s consent, as Washington has always been a bit paranoid about the possibility of a Paris-Berlin-Moscow alliance, to bring NATO to the brink of war with Russia by means of shooting down the Russian bomber, thereby crushing the emerging alliance in the bud.

  9. B says:

    I suspect Martin Armstrong has the correct assessment when he says the Turks did this to distract from their impending debt crisis.

    The SAR bird was most likely shot down by Turk-backed rebels using Russian-made MANPADS.

    There is the valid question of what the Russians were doing in the area, given that it’s a ways away from IS or any of the major areas where Assad’s regime is fighting for its life.

    Also, what happened to the impending fall of Aleppo and the unofficial conquest of Raqqa?

    • red says:

      4,000 CIA imported TOW missiles + rebel offense happened. Syrian troops have moved on towards cutting of rebel supply lines instead of taking back major cities. They’re still advancing on every front slowly.

      • B says:

        Sure. Progress is inexorable.

        I am cool with those TOWs. They are killing Hezbollah and Quds Force guys.

        • red says:

          >I am cool with those TOWs. They are killing Hezbollah and Quds Force guys.

          Not like the US might someday soon arm the Palestinians with them, eh? Jews are always so short sighted.

          • Irving says:

            It really isn’t within the nature of things for one side in a conflict to have such a sizable military advantage over long periods of time. Eventually the Palestinians will catch up — they’ll have to catch up, it wouldn’t make sense if they didn’t — and when they do, however they do it, things are gonna get ugly, I think.

          • B says:

            The US has been arming the Palestinians since Oslo at the very least. As for what happens if they decide to give them TOWs, the Russians have been providing Hezbollah and Hamas Kornets for quite some time, so what’s the difference? In order to get to the long term, you have to survive the short term.

            >Eventually the Palestinians will catch up — they’ll have to catch up, it wouldn’t make sense if they didn’t

            As the Soviets said, Marx’s teaching is almighty because it is correct. They have to catch up because they just do!

            These Arabs have been raping goats for a long time, and I doubt they will stop any time soon. The second their American sponsors bail, they are meat.

        • Irving says:

          >As the Soviets said, Marx’s teaching is almighty because it is correct. They have to catch up because they just do!

          Except that what I said had no relationship at all to Marxist teleology or anything of the kind. What I said was simply that it is historically unprecedented for one group to have the upper-hand on another group past a certain length of time. Usually what happens is that the balance tilts in favor of the previously inferior group, and there isn’t any reason to believe that the same won’t happen here.

          >These Arabs have been raping goats for a long time, and I doubt they will stop any time soon.

          Palestinians aren’t even Arab and in any case I’ve never heard of goat raping being a widespread practice among them or any other people for that matter. I could be wrong though. But let’s not cast stones, especially given that customs just as strange can be found with other groups:
          http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/21/rabbis-new-york-herpes-oral-suction-circumcision .

          >The second their American sponsors bail, they are meat.

          I’ve no doubt that there are Jews that would want to expel or else genocide the remaining Palestinian population. But I doubt that it will come to that any time soon, given that at this point it seems to me that the Jews have more to lose than to gain from doing. I agree though that now would be the best time to do it, if it must be done, while the Palestinians are still weak.

          • B says:

            >What I said was simply that it is historically unprecedented for one group to have the upper-hand on another group past a certain length of time. Usually what happens is that the balance tilts in favor of the previously inferior group, and there isn’t any reason to believe that the same won’t happen here.

            What do you mean? The Chinese have been dominant over the Uighurs for a very long time. Everywhere Turks and Arabs have coexisted in reasonable numbers, the Turks have ruled for a very long time. Everywhere subsaharan Blacks and Arabs have coexisted, the Arabs have ruled. Etc.

            >Palestinians aren’t even Arab

            They are mustarvim, Arabicized descendants of a mix of Greeks, Egyptians, Kurds, Jews, Arabs, Samarians, Bosnians, Persians, Turks and who knows what. They are culturally and linguistically Arab, which is to say dysfunctional, murderous thieves.

            >and in any case I’ve never heard of goat raping being a widespread practice among them or any other people for that matter.

            I have. In any case, raping goats is a metaphor for widespread incompetence and stupidity.

            >I could be wrong though. But let’s not cast stones, especially given that customs just as strange can be found with other groups:
            http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/21/rabbis-new-york-herpes-oral-suction-circumcision .

            Big difference: the mohels doing oral suction (who are a minority) are following an ancient medical practice based on outdated medical ideas (Hellenistic medicine) during a public ritual. Arabs raping goats are just raping goats.

            >But I doubt that it will come to that any time soon, given that at this point it seems to me that the Jews have more to lose than to gain from doing.

            Yeah, we’d lose all those valuable contributions the Arabs make, like the daily stabbing attacks. Also, we’d miss their raw sewage dumping, trash burning in nature preserves, idiotic driving practices, murderous internal feuds, thievery and…no, I think that about covers everything. Oh, also they raise olives using iron age methodology.

            Or do you mean that once the EU and US fade off the scene, we’d face international outrage for expelling them? Unlikely: Russia, China and India do not give a shit about them. Neither does the rest of the Arab world, really.

          • Jack says:

            >Yeah, we’d lose all those valuable contributions the Arabs make, like the daily stabbing attacks. Also, we’d miss their raw sewage dumping, trash burning in nature preserves, idiotic driving practices, murderous internal feuds, thievery and…no, I think that about covers everything. Oh, also they raise olives using iron age methodology.

            Do you envision the importation of myriads of Chinese construction workers, or perhaps you think shit-skinned Jews will be into construction because, well, “someone has to do it”? As long as Israel depends on Arabs to build stuff, it will remain reluctant to transfer them. Israel needs to build a lot more stuff due mostly to population growth, so either find a decent alternative to replace the Arabs so you can then physically remove the non-Jewish kebab, or keep being reliant on Arab labor. Since nobody in the world wants to be exterminated by 14 y/o girls armed with scissors who can’t tell an Arab from a Jew, you better start importing masses of slants and slopes to build those buildings immediately.

            It’s not because of the incredibly delicious hummus that Arabs are allowed to stay.

          • B says:

            Moron, we already have Chinese guest workers here. They make three times more than Arab construction workers and are about 5 times more effective since they actually follow instructions and know how to read and use a level. When done with a contract, they go home.

            The security expenditures on the Arab population far outweigh any benefit from their cheap crappy labor.

          • B says:

            Also, I am touched by your concern for securing the existence of our people and a future for Jewish children.

          • Jack says:

            You don’t have, currently, enough Gooks to maintain your advanced civilization, so you rely on Arabs. You will need a lot more of them if you banish kebab. These are simple facts.

          • Jack says:

            By “a lot”, I mean replacing the entire sector of goatfucking builders with chin-chong ding-dong builders. That is plenty.

          • B says:

            Gosh, where could we possibly find enough Chinese construction workers to fill the labor requirements of a nation with several million people?

            I’m sure eventually, if we put our brightest minds on it, we will be able to find a source.

          • B says:

            Also, today construction requires lots of skilled labor making a decent wage (for instance, in the US a crane operator makes $60-70K per year on average,) and there are plenty of Jews in Israel who make a living in this field. I know a few, and they are not all Sepharadim or Yemenites-plenty of Ashkenazim in there.

          • Jack says:

            Fine. But Israeli Cathedral is overly invested in Arab construction (and general) labor, so I believe a few establishment heads will have to get decapitated for TPTB to become positively convicted of the necessity/expediency of importing the dog-eaters.

            It literally goes without saying that, as posited by the Talmud and prophesied by the OT, Jews rely on goyim for labor, are dependent rather than independent.

          • B says:

            Nobody is independent and nobody has ever been. Even before the agricultural revolution there were cross continental trade routes. That we are able to generate enough value and babies to have a construction boom is a great blessing. Soon the gas fields offshore will start producing in earnest. So with all that, if we import construction labor or manufactured goods, it’s what, a sign that we are exploiting the poor goyim? A Chinese construction worker here makes several thousand dollars per month. He’s being cruelly used?

          • Irving says:

            B,

            From what I understand, the Chinese have been at war with nomadic Turkic tribes (of which the Uighurs are one) for thousands of years and have even been conquered and ruled by them at various points in their history. Turks have ruled Arabs for a long time, but then the Turks used to be their slaves Arabs for some time as well. Arabs have for the most part been dominant over blacks but there have been exceptions (i.e. Mali).

            Anyway, all of the above is really unimportant. The main point is that the Jews and Palestinians are at war with one another and, though the Jews have the upper-hand now, it is inconceivable that they can maintain it to such a degree that the Palestinians are always going to have to resort to stabbing attacks or whatever in order to kill Jews. Even if they never become stronger than the Jews, they can become strong enough such that they’ll be able to cause quite a bit of damage were they inclined to do so.

            >Big difference: the mohels doing oral suction (who are a minority) are following an ancient medical practice based on outdated medical ideas (Hellenistic medicine) during a public ritual. Arabs raping goats are just raping goats.

            If goat fucking is really a thing among Arabs, I’m sure that it is rare and that the people that do it have an explanation for why they do such things. Similar to the practice of “oral suction” among Jews: it is rare and there’s a religious rationalization for it.

            >Yeah, we’d lose all those valuable contributions the Arabs make…

            Well, that explanation makes as much sense as any other. In the end, if the Jews wanted to expel or genocide the Palestinians, they would have done so by now. The fact that they haven’t, even though the long term threat they present is obvious to anyone, says a lot.

            • jim says:

              if the Jews wanted to expel or genocide the Palestinians, they would have done so by now. The fact that they haven’t, even though the long term threat they present is obvious to anyone, says a lot.

              What it says is that the Cathedral rules Israel.

              Israel needs memetic sovereignty – which is to say, needs its own state religion, in place of progressivism. Judaism was originally a state religion, but exile Judaism has evolved away from being a state religion, and is now inherently subversive of its host society, even if that host society is Israel. Jews are no longer in exile, but Judaism without the temple is still in exile, and most rabbis don’t particularly want their religion to come home.

          • peppermint says:

            Usually, either the inferior group wasn’t actually inferior which is why it couldn’t be destroyed, or the superior group crushes them. None of that applies to the post-WWII Jew-run world, of course. Nothing will make sense until the Jews are expelled from all countries.

          • Irving says:

            Jim,
            >What it says is that the Cathedral rules Israel.

            Israelis are about the most pro-American, and therefore pro-Cathedral, population in the world. 81% report being pro-American and, in fact, that number seems misleadingly low because of the likelihood that the poll included non-Jewish Israelis who, for obvious reasons, are likely to be hostile to America*. Although it is obvious that Israel’s relationship with America is making it impossible for the Jews to expel or genocide the Palestinians, as they probably should in order to forestall future threats, it isn’t as if the Jews are particularly bothered by that or are willing to break off ties with America so that they can do what probably should be done. In the end, they like being run by the Cathedral (which is itself heavily Jewish, but that’s another story).

            *Here is a link to the poll: http://www.pewglobal.org/database/indicator/1/

            >Judaism without the temple is still in exile, and most rabbis don’t particularly want their religion to come home

            There isn’t any reason to suppose that there is some monocausal explanation for why Jews won’t expel or genocide the Palestinians. It may well have partly to do with their religious situation, which may well be as you’ve described it, but that hardly accounts for everything. Anyway, it seems obvious that one major factor at work here is that Jews aren’t really committed to the Zionist project. They don’t just want power in Israel, though they do want that; they also want power everywhere else, and the smartest among them know that the power to be had in Israel is nothing compared to the power to be had, that is to say the power that they do have, on Wall Street. After all, it isn’t as if Soros made his fortune by rolling around in the mud with Palestinians.

          • peppermint says:

            Non-Jewish Israeli sounds as dumb as Breton of Asian extraction lol

            What percentage of Israelis support ISIS? Is it the same as the percentage of Non-Jewish Israelis, or does ISIS enjoy a wider support base in Israel?

          • Irving says:

            peppermint,

            As I’m sure you know, technically speaking not all Israeli citizens are Jews. What I meant above is that the poll I referenced probably included Israeli Bedouins, Israeli Muslims, Israeli Christians, etc. And from what I can tell, Israeli Muslims are quite supportive of ISIS compared to Muslims elsewhere in the region, astonishingly enough.

    • pdimov says:

      “The SAR bird was most likely shot down by Turk-backed rebels using Russian-made MANPADS.”

      Here’s the video of the moderate rebels moderately hitting the helicopter with a TOW while moderately allah-akbaring:

      https://www.rt.com/news/323306-video-russia-helicopter-syria/

      “Also, what happened to the impending fall of Aleppo and the unofficial conquest of Raqqa?”

      When Russians are done with Raqqa, there won’t be much left to conquest.

      • B says:

        Nice hit. I guess they did nail it with a TOW.

        Yeah, yeah, the Russians are gonna bomb Raqqa into the stone age. Where have I heard that before…

        • pdimov says:

          Not “going to”. They are doing it.

          • B says:

            Do you have any idea how much ordnance the U.S. dropped on Vietnam and Korea, or Afghanistan for that matter?

            Russia is not willing or able to rule, and so will not win.

            • jim says:

              Do you have any idea how much ordnance the U.S. dropped on Vietnam and Korea, or Afghanistan for that matter?

              American ordinance was plowing the jungle. Russian ordinance lands on people, houses, and vehicles. It is a significant difference.

              Further, looks to me that main discharge of high explosives does not come from bombers, but from heavy mortars, which is to say, from quite short range. If you are using mortars, you are willing to rule.

          • pdimov says:

            Speaking of which, B, what’s your opinion of Debka?

            From where I sit, it alternately looks like Mossad’s propaganda wing and work of a single pensioner.

            http://www.debka.com/article/25032/Massive-Russian-blanket-air-bombardment-is-flattening-Raqqa

          • pdimov says:

            Flattening Raqqa does not require intent or will to rule.

          • B says:

            A lot of the bombing of North Vietnam and Korea involved killing civilians. The bombing campaigns against Germany and Japan did as well.

            The only case I know where an aerial campaign without ground based conquest worked against a major enemy is Serbia 1999.

            I guess we will see shortly.

            • jim says:

              A lot of the bombing of North Vietnam and Korea involved killing civilians.

              I don’t think so.

              The bombing campaigns against Germany and Japan did as well.

              Thus Japan and Germany were defeated, while Vietnam and North Korea were not defeated.

              • Benito says:

                Was Phoenix, Rolling Thunder, Ranch Hand, Linebacker I and II, Menu, Arc Light, Barrell Roll and Tiger Hound not enough?

          • B says:

            Where are you seeing Russians using heavy mortars?

            The Americans used a lot of arty in Iraq during the initial push and then in Fallujah. Without any willingness to rule. And Assad’s military used a lot of arty until the Russians showed up, which didn’t seem to do the trick.

            • jim says:

              Where are you seeing Russians using heavy mortars?

              On their videos. Or maybe it is Muslims operating the heavy mortars, but it seems to be Russian mortars and Russian videos.

              The Americans used a lot of arty in Iraq during the initial push and then in Fallujah. Without any willingness to rule.

              But the Americans did in fact rule Fallujah with an iron hand very successfully for quite a while, until Obama dragged them out.

          • B says:

            Americans never ruled Fallujah.

            The pre-Obama accommodation was that the Americans, after flattening the city the second time, installed their proxy government of Iraq there, which also didn’t rule. Then the Americans paid off the local tribes through the Sons of Iraq program. The local tribes handed over or killed the foreign AQ guys. So the US was paying the local tribes to rule themselves, and the local tribes were not attacking the US.

            This is not “ruling.” Ruling is administration, tax collection, adjudication of disputes.

            • jim says:

              Americans never ruled Fallujah.

              You live in your own universe. In my universe, US soldiers not only ruled Fallujah, they operated an iron fisted police state in Fallujah.

          • B says:

            In my universe, I was in Iraq in 2007-2009 with a 6 month break in the middle, and spent the first half in Northwest Iraq, and am quite familiar with what the situation in Fallujah was. “Ruling” a place means administering and adjudicating it. This is what the US government does in, say, Manhattan. The Marines moved around Fallujah in squads with fire support on call. Even by the standards of Detroit, which the US government can’t be said to really rule, this was not ruling.

            • jim says:

              Even by the standards of Detroit, which the US government can’t be said to really rule, this was not ruling.

              If nobody could go in or out of Detroit except by army permission, and every person who had any authority in Detroit had to go before a US army officer and get his eyes scanned and ID issued, and could be removed from power by the army for any reason or no reason at all, if the army was apt to kill trouble makers out of hand, or have them killed by its bully boys that it appointed and could remove at whim, I would be pretty sure the army was ruling Detroit.

          • B says:

            I’m pretty sure that everyone adult living in Detroit has an government-issued ID, and that the US government could easily close off all entrances and exits to Detroit. It’s not ruling.

            For another example of not ruling, we had a town of about 50K in the desert north of Anbar which we would go into and out of in platoon-sized elements. And we would sometimes snatch people out of there. We would go down there once or twice a week. Now, the local police station staff filmed a video of themselves partying with the local branch of AQ in the police station, typical goatrape stuff, dancing around and waving weapons and flags. We went down there, arrested the top 3 guys and fired all the cops, then replaced them with the Iraqi Army. Were we “ruling”? Certainly not in any way that Lord Cromer would have recognized as such.

            >if the army was apt to kill trouble makers out of hand, or have them killed by its bully boys that it appointed and could remove at whim

            And there you have it. The US did not “appoint” the Sons of Iraq. It made a deal with them. And of course it did not remove them. At least I never heard of any of them getting removed.

            So what you have is a local mafia-type power structure which actually ruled and with which the US made a deal, where they would not attack each other, the US would pay them and give them weapons, and the locals would hand over Al Qaeda guys who’d come over the border, or kill them themselves (which they had been doing anyway.) That’s not ruling.

          • pdimov says:

            I really don’t see what ruling’s got to do with it. Russians don’t want to rule Raqqa.

          • B says:

            Well, they’re not going to win the war unless SOMEONE on their side rules Raqqa (and the rest of the mess.) And Assad’s boys plainly can’t do it. So there’s no exit point, no exit strategy. Big mess.

            • jim says:

              Well, they’re not going to win the war unless SOMEONE on their side rules Raqqa (and the rest of the mess.) And Assad’s boys plainly can’t do it

              Well, Assad’s boys cannot do it when foreigners inject masses of arms and money to anti Assad militias. But Russia seems to be successfully making it a lot more expensive to support war in Syria.

              Asymmetric war works when the weaker side gets foreign support, and that foreign support is off limits and cannot be stopped, and/or the stronger side is restrained from going after the weaker side, as for example operating by police rules while the weaker side operates by war rules.

              Russia seems to be successfully cutting off support for Isis. Thus Raqqa is bound to fall, after withering on the vine for a while. However, cutting off support for the “ethnically Turkish militia”, aka the Turkish army, seems to be a bit more difficult, and it is not clear that Russia has the will to do it. On the other hand, the Russians are sending rather strong signals that they do have the will to do it, but Turkey, confident in US backing, is prepared to call their bluff. If they are not bluffing, we get direct war between Russia and Turkey, as their proxy fig leaves drop. If the US is not bluffing then we get direct war between the US and Russia. Russia might be bluffing. I am pretty sure the US is bluffing. So probably not World War III this time. Direct war between Russia and Turkey, however, is quite likely. Russia cuts Turkish support for the “ethnically Turkish militia”, resulting in direct conflict between Russian air and armor and Turkish air and armor.

          • B says:

            >I don’t think so.

            I don’t know what to tell you except that no source I know of agrees with you.

            >Thus Japan and Germany were defeated, while Vietnam and North Korea were not defeated.

            Japan was defeated through being starved via submarine warfare and the island-hopping campaign, followed by nukes (and if not for the nukes and the willingness of the Japanese leadership to surrender to spare the lives of Japanese subjects, a land invasion would have been necessary (and was in fact started in Okinawa.) Germany was defeated through a land invasion from two sides. Aerial bombing by itself was a total failure.

            • jim says:

              > > > A lot of the bombing of North Vietnam and Korea involved killing civilians.

              > > I don’t think so.

              > I don’t know what to tell you except that no source I know of agrees with you.

              All derived sources say that US bombing caused terrible destruction of civilians. Except that the Pentagon said at the time that bombing was handicapped by the stupid politicians forbidding them from doing anything that might possibly harm civilians. Now go looking for a primary source – for example footage of civilian’s homes blown up.

              There is a famous picture of a little girl injured – but she was in the jungle, and enemy soldiers were also hiding in the jungle – she was not sitting in her house, or even working in the fields. So the same principle applies as with lynchings, female scientists, black scientists, or female pilots. Look at the poster girl or poster boy. If they cannot find a good poster girl, the phenomenon supposedly represented by the poster girl does not exist.Z

          • B says:

            For instance, the Kurds have discovered a network of tunnels underneath Sinjar. Apparently, IS began prepping for an air campaign long before the Russians showed up: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20151126_Militants_built_tunnel_network_under_Iraqi_city.html

            Bombing from the air will plainly be insufficient, and the Russians will have no choice but to go in there and dig them out.

            • jim says:

              Digging them out gets a whole lot easier after a fair while has passed with no civilians to tax or to provide logistics.

          • B says:

            >Digging them out gets a whole lot easier after a fair while has passed with no civilians to tax or to provide logistics.

            I doubt that most civilians will flee from aerial bombing, or that the logistics issue will prove decisive in the absence of a ground assault.

            • jim says:

              Colonialist bombings with vastly less powerful warcraft that we now possess were quite effective in depopulating recalcitrant areas. If the russians cannot depopulate Islamic State, they are not trying.

              The German attack on Britain was unsuccessful because the British planes won, not because airplanes are ineffectual. Reflect on Dresden, or large areas of Japan.

              It is entirely practical to destroy every vehicle whenever it is used, flatten every house, shoot every animal, and poison every crop over a very large area. Why limit yourself to oil tankers? Get the food trucks.

              The colonialists, faced with irregular warfare, would respond by depopulating areas using ground forces, denying their enemies anyone to tax. Then, as technology marched on, they discovered that air power could depopulate areas more cheaply and effectively. Then they started feeling guilty about this discovery, and stopped using the tactic.

          • BobbyBrigs says:

            >The only case I know where an aerial campaign without ground based conquest worked against a major enemy is Serbia 1999.

            You and everyone else who makes this claim are wrong. It was the NATO ground invasion of Kosvoso and the Serbian army fleeing without fighting that caused the colaspe.

          • peppermint says:

            As I understood at the time, the battle of Fallujah was a reprisal for a particularly glaring provocation with the intention that more equals pf Arabic persuasion would then join the terrorists while the media would point out the futility of bombing everything.

            Because of the official belief that violence solves nothing, the US retaliated to maintain morale but scrupulously avoided actually ruling.

            Today, the growing insanity of the mainstream conspiracy theorists, what you need to say to be edgy, is an indicator of the collapse of the Narrative. Without a healthy official belief system, people may feel empowered to make good decisions that would reflect favorably upon them and help their family, community, or nation.

            Meanwhile, the only people who are actually edgy are the ones who deny not only the Holocaust, by every bad thing that has happened to the Jews, who laugh at fatties and faggots, who talk about how great Hitler was. This has been the case for the past five years – AYAK was an occasional greeting in the chans back then – by now there are big websites devoted to nonstop naziverhalten. rassenhass macht Spass.

        • jim says:

          You heard it before when the state department refused to allow the Pentagon to bomb anyone into the stone age.

          Bombing Grozny into the stone age worked fine. Mortaring it also.

          • B says:

            No, bombing Grozny into the stone age did not work fine. The Russians had to invade the city with about two divisions’ worth of troops and occupy it, and then administer it, building governmental structures and taking losses all the time.

    • jim says:

      Also, what happened to the impending fall of Aleppo and the unofficial conquest of Raqqa?

      Aleppo is surrounded and withering on the vine. Russians are flattening Raqqa the way they flattened Grozny. The fall of Aleppo looks inevitable, and Raqqa looks like Grozny.

    • jim says:

      There is the valid question of what the Russians were doing in the area, given that it’s a ways away from IS or any of the major areas where Assad’s regime is fighting for its life.

      Your method of argument is so stereotypically Jewish – using any argument that comes to hand without worrying about whether it is consistent with your other arguments or other factual claims in the next sentence or preceding sentence.

      Allepo and Isis are sustained by Turkey. The Russian bomber was bombing Turkish logistic support for Aleppo and Isis. Turkey shot down the Russian bomber to save Aleppo from falling. That Washington gave permission for Turkey to attempt to enforce its no fly zone over Syria indicates that Washington fears Aleppo is about to fall.

      • B says:

        The Russians have positioned themselves in this war as attacking IS. If the rationale is that they can attack anything in the IS supply chain, they can go ahead and bomb Istanbul, Dubai and DC. But they should not be surprised if their planes get shot down in those cases.

        For instance, in the Syrian Golan, the Russians have been pretty meticulous about coordination with Israel. For good reason-Israel popped a Syrian SU-24 for this sort of thing a little while back.

        In general, since Russia runs logistics through the Bosporus, it is well-served by maintaining the mutual fiction that it is just fighting IS and not get tangled up with Turkey explicitly.

        • jim says:

          The Russians have positioned themselves in this war as attacking IS. If the rationale is that they can attack anything in the IS supply chain, they can go ahead and bomb Istanbul, Dubai and DC.

          The rationale is that they can bomb anything in the supply chain if the government supposed in authority over that land authorizes – and presumably the Syrian government authorizes bombing, and indeed killing on sight, turks in Syria

          • B says:

            Eh, alright. But the Turks previously announced a no-fly zone 5 miles south of their border: http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-violated-turkish-airspace-because-turkey-moved-its-border/5480430

            And regardless of whether you think that no-fly zone should be respected, Russia previously admitted violating Turkish airspace, “by accident”:
            http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/analysis-turkey-downing-russian-jet-151124163107795.html
            http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-russian-jet-breached-turkish-air-space-20151005-story.html

            I am sure that Russia could have interdicted ISIS supply chain 10 km inside Syria just as easily. Why it did not choose to do so, knowing the risks (having strayed over the border before, due to “weather conditions”,) is a question-I assume that it’s all part of the game. Acting shocked is also part of the game.

            Personally, I would like all sides involved to lose and take their time doing so.

            • jim says:

              So, according to you it is perfectly fair that the Turks declare a no fly zone over Syria and Russians should respect it. Why then is it not fair for Russians to declare a no fly zone over Turkey – or over Israel for that matter?

              Turkey is placing tanks on the border, either with the intent of relieving Aleppo, or with the intent of threatening to relieve Aleppo. Seems to me Russians should declare a demilitarized zone five miles into Turkey. Or a hundred miles into Turkey. And then it would be perfectly legitimate to blow up those tanks. And murder the prisoners. And while they are at it, a similarly demilitarized zone in Israel. Murder those prisoners also.

          • B says:

            According to me, in international relations might makes right, especially in our neck of the woods. Hence Syria has been running rockets to Hezbollah, and we’ve been hitting them with airstrikes inside Syria and Lebanon, for quite some time. If the Russians have the wherewithal to declare a no-fly zone over Turkey and enforce it, good on them.

            But if we want to deal with other countries without immediately going to the gun, then we can compromise.

            If the country next door is in the middle of a civil war and flying CAS missions, it’s reasonable to say that you will not tolerate its aircraft coming within 5 miles of your border. As the resident of a country bordering Syria, I personally am fine with the IDF shooting down any Syrian plane that comes close to our borders, which has happened. And the Russians understand this, and have set up a joint air coordination center with the IAF to prevent this sort of thing from happening to them. They did not set up such a center with the Turks, and so we have what we have, and it was bound to happen sooner or later. In exactly the same way, the Pakis shot down a few Soviet aircraft during the Afghan War.

            >Turkey is placing tanks on the border, either with the intent of relieving Aleppo, or with the intent of threatening to relieve Aleppo.

            This is not a serious threat.

          • B says:

            …effing the ineffable, etc.

            It’s amazing how the same Russians who were obviously lying scumbags a generation ago magically joined the side of the angels when they attacked the lying scumbags of Turkey. Their pilot was MURDERED!

            Interestingly, a few months ago, it was IS that was on the side of the angels according to you. They were reactionaries, practically UR-readers.

            • jim says:

              Russians who were obviously lying scumbags a generation ago magically joined the side of the angels

              When their official belief system was communism, they behaved badly, as communism demands.

              Now their official belief system is Russian Orthodoxy, they behave well, as Russian orthodoxy demands.

              While the correlation between the behavior of the individual and his belief system is weak, the correlation between the behavior of the group and their official belief system is very strong, since they rely on their official belief system for coordination.

              Interestingly, a few months ago, it was IS that was on the side of the angels according to you.

              Islamic State is the lesser evil, relative to the Cathedral, for Islam is the lesser evil, relative to progressivism. It is the greater evil, relative to Russian Orthodoxy.

          • pdimov says:

            “If the Russians have the wherewithal to declare a no-fly zone over Turkey and enforce it, good on them.”

            They already have. I hear that Turkey has absolutely voluntarily grounded its F-16s.

            “They did not set up such a center with the Turks, and so we have what we have, and it was bound to happen sooner or later.”

            That’s nonsense, sorry. Russians have been flying there for what, two months now? The two reasons Turks shot down the plane were (a) it was flying without fighter escort and (b) US has promised them to back them up.

            Perhaps you’ve missed the earlier incidents:

            http://theaviationist.com/2015/10/06/mig-29-locked-on-tuaf-f-16s/

            After that, it was peace and quiet in the air. Until now.

          • B says:

            >They already have. I hear that Turkey has absolutely voluntarily grounded its F-16s.

            Well, good for them! Are the Americans still flying out of Incirlik?

            >That’s nonsense, sorry. Russians have been flying there for what, two months now? The two reasons Turks shot down the plane were (a) it was flying without fighter escort and (b) US has promised them to back them up.

            Sure. Same reason Pakis shot down Soviet aircraft crossing into their airspace. Same reason anyone does anything-they think they can get away with it and they see a profit in it. BTW, Turkey has just released a recording of them warning the Russians, and have claimed that they thought it was a Syrian bird (which they’ve previously popped for coming too close/into their airspace.)

            >After that, it was peace and quiet in the air. Until now.

            It’s always peace and quiet until it’s not. I doubt the Russians will escalate on Turkey since, as I said, their logistics go through the Bosporus which Turkey explicitly has the right to close to the shipping of countries at war.

          • pdimov says:

            “BTW, Turkey has just released a recording of them warning the Russians, and have claimed that they thought it was a Syrian bird…”

            We all knew they were going to claim that. It doesn’t matter. Their own NATO allies don’t believe them, let alone Russia.

            “I doubt the Russians will escalate on Turkey…”

            Depends on what you mean by “escalate”. Russians are deploying an S-400 under orders to shoot down anything that presents a danger to Russian forces.

            “… since, as I said, their logistics go through the Bosporus which Turkey explicitly has the right to close to the shipping of countries at war.”

            This will be a lot of fun, well, at least for people comfortably removed from the conflict zone.

          • B says:

            >Depends on what you mean by “escalate”. Russians are deploying an S-400 under orders to shoot down anything that presents a danger to Russian forces.

            Alright, very interesting to see how that works out.

            >This will be a lot of fun, well, at least for people comfortably removed from the conflict zone.

            What will Russia do, pull a Gallipoli? Come on.

            Anyway, I’ve got the popcorn out. Russia has apparently cut off Turkish imports, so will need to replace them. There’s at least one country in the Eastern Med that can fill the gap. Nice point to pivot from BDS-I doubt Russians give a shit about whether their tomatoes were grown in the settlements.

          • pdimov says:

            This is interesting if you can understand Russian:

            https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1681524942090255

          • pdimov says:

            There we go.

            “Russian forces launched at least a dozen airstrikes against insurgent-held areas near the Turkey-Syria border where the Sukhoi SU-24 fighter jet was shot down by the Turkish army yesterday.

            Heavy bombardment hit areas controlled by Turkmen rebels, the group claiming to have shot and killed one of the pilots of the Russian jet as he parachuted out of the flaming wreckage, and attempted to kill his co-pilot.”

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3333117/Downed-Russian-pilot-picked-Syrian-army-envoy.html

            I’m not quite sure what Erdogan was (and is) thinking.

            • jim says:

              I’m not quite sure what Erdogan was (and is) thinking.

              The center of Aleppo is now controlled by Syrian government forces, which also control a big swathe of territory between Aleppo and Isis, meaning that Isis can no longer attack Aleppo.

              However, the Turks are continually running convoys to Aleppo, to keep the part of Aleppo that they control and the Russians are continually bombing the crap out of those convoys. Looks to me that Turkey and the US are doing whatever it takes, moment to moment, to keep Aleppo from falling to the Syrian government. Theoretically it is an ethnic Turkish militia doing the fighting, a proxy for the Turkish army, but as Turkish military support for that militia becomes more direct and overt this fig leaf is falling. Looks to me that both Russia and Turkey are expecting and preparing for a conventional tank and air battle between Russian and Turkish forces on the outskirts of Aleppo, although they are both trying to avoid this and keep the proxy fig leaves in place. Turkey is massing tanks on the border for an armored vehicle charge to the relief of Aleppo, and Russia is mounting anti air capability to deny those tanks Turkish air cover. The tanks make no sense, except they intend to relieve Aleppo, and the anti air makes no sense, except the Russians expect them to attempt to relieve Aleppo.

          • pdimov says:

            “However, the Turks are continually running convoys to Aleppo, to keep the part of Aleppo that they control and the Russians are continually bombing the crap out of those convoys.”

            But the Russians weren’t bombing the Turkish convoys before they shot down the plane. That’s my point.

          • B says:

            > Looks to me that both Russia and Turkey are expecting and preparing for a conventional tank and air battle between Russian and Turkish forces on the outskirts of Aleppo, although they are both trying to avoid this and keep the proxy fig leaves in place.

            I will bet you two bottles of Ardbeg that in the next two months there will neither be Turkish conventional forces anywhere near Aleppo nor any ground confrontation between Russian and Turkish conventional ground forces.

            >Turkey is massing tanks on the border for an armored vehicle charge to the relief of Aleppo, and Russia is mounting anti air capability to deny those tanks Turkish air cover. The tanks make no sense, except they intend to relieve Aleppo, and the anti air makes no sense, except the Russians expect them to attempt to relieve Aleppo.

            Turk tank massing makes sense as a gesture. In fact, were the Turks planning a conventional attack against the Russians, they would do it in a concealed way.

            The S-400 makes sense if the Russians want to cover their and the Syrians’ operations in the North from Turkish interference.

            But as I said, if you feel strongly about it, please ante up Ardbeg.

            BTW, there’s a difference between “Turks” in Syria and Turkmen insurgents in Syria. There is a large Turkmen minority in both Syria and Iraq who have been quite active in the wars of the last 12 years. It is possible that the Turks have some special forces guys on the ground, but not necessary.

            • jim says:

              > Looks to me that both Russia and Turkey are expecting and preparing for a conventional tank and air battle between Russian and Turkish forces on the outskirts of Aleppo, although they are both trying to avoid this and keep the proxy fig leaves in place.

              I will bet you two bottles of Ardbeg that in the next two months there will neither be Turkish conventional forces anywhere near Aleppo nor any ground confrontation between Russian and Turkish conventional ground forces

              If I win, chances are that the world blows up and I cannot collect. They are flirting with World War III. As I said, probably not World War III this time, probably not next time, probably they will find a way to avoid war between Russia and a Nato partner, but if such confrontations keep happening sooner or later one of them will slip out control.

              Chances are that there will not be actual battle, but they are threatening each other with actual battle.

              The Turks put their tanks there to say that “if Aleppo falls, it might lead to World War III, so don’t take Aleppo.” The Russians put their anti air there to say: “We don’t want trouble, but if you are looking for trouble, we can supply.” And are going right on interdicting Turkish forces trying to prevent the fall of Aleppo.

              Nobody has blinked yet. Chances are someone will blink. Care to make a prediction on who will blink first? If you cannot predict who is going to blink first, there is a good chance nobody blinks, and we get conventional war between a Nato Partner and Russia without the fig leaf of proxies.

              Either Russia stops interdicting Turkish forces (Russia blinks) or Turks let Aleppo fall. (Turkey blinks.)

              I will bet you a bottle that either Aleppo will fall to Syrian government forces, within a year, or Turkish regular military will openly cross the border to stop it from falling, thereby risking World War III. In other words, will bet a bottle that regardless of whether Turkey blinks, the Russians will not blink.

            • jim says:

              Turk tank massing makes sense as a gesture.

              It is a threatening gesture. Perhaps a bluff. Russians call their bluff. And then?

          • B says:

            From my perspective, by the way, the S-400 deployment is wonderful.

            It used to be that to get ELINT on the latest Russian gear, the IAF would have to go out of its way and take great risks to get the Russians to paint their decoys so they’d have something to analyze. But now the Russians will be locking on to Turks next door. Plenty of great intel, for free.

          • pdimov says:

            “From my perspective, by the way, the S-400 deployment is wonderful.”

            I’m sure the IAF are just giddy with joy and excitement, and immensely grateful to Erdogan and Davutoglu, who have enabled this development.

            An S-400 covering your airspace is basically like winning the lottery. Or perhaps playing the lottery each time you take off.

          • pdimov says:

            “BTW, there’s a difference between “Turks” in Syria and Turkmen insurgents in Syria.”

            Of course. They are basically separate species by this point.

            http://anfenglish.com/news/turkmen-commander-turns-out-to-be-turkish-nationalist

          • B says:

            >An S-400 covering your airspace is basically like winning the lottery. Or perhaps playing the lottery each time you take off.

            Yes, terrifying Russian tech untested in battle and pointed in the other direction.

            As I said, previously, the Israeli air force had to go to great lengths with decoys and so on to get the latest Russian SAMs to paint them. Now it can just sit there gathering intel.

            >The Turks put their tanks there to say that “if Aleppo falls, it might lead to World War III, so don’t take Aleppo.”

            Eh, maybe. But since the Turks have not made any overt claim to this extent, maybe they’re covering the 5 mile strip.

            >It is a threatening gesture. Perhaps a bluff. Russians call their bluff. And then?

            And then probably nothing. If Aleppo falls, the Turks will do nothing. Getting into a shooting war with the Russians is too stupid even for them. Perhaps they will cut the Bosporus, which they are allowed to do under international law.

            I suspect Aleppo will not fall within the next couple of months, can’t predict what will happen in a year.

            • jim says:

              >An S-400 covering your airspace is basically like winning the lottery. Or perhaps playing the lottery each time you take off.

              Yes, terrifying Russian tech untested in battle and pointed in the other direction.

              It may well be terrifying, if it lives up to Russian claims. As to which direction it is pointed, it is pointed at anyone who would interfere with Russian air operations in Syria, and as you said a few comments ago, accidental and misinterpreted interference is quite likely.

          • B says:

            Making grandiose claims about tech which then delivers a subgrandiose performance in battle is a Russian tradition. I pointed to Operation Mole Cricket 19 as an example of a Russian SAM group being wiped out by Israel with combined arms and superior SIGINT and ELINT. The Russian version is more informative than the English:

            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%C2%AB%D0%9C%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B0_19%C2%BB

            As for accidents happening, we have a joint air coordination center with the Russians precisely in order that they do not happen.

          • pdimov says:

            “Yes, terrifying Russian tech untested in battle and pointed in the other direction.”

            S-400 doesn’t have a direction, and I’m left with the impression that people do consider it terrifying. It’s basically an upgraded S-300 which does seem well-tested in battle:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_(missile)#Combat_history

            and whose delivery to Iran I don’t recall being celebrated by the IAF.

            “Israel’s purchase of F-35 Lightning II fighters was allegedly motivated in part to nullify the threat of S-300 missiles that were, at the time the fighters were initially sought, subject to a potential arms sale to Iran.[67][68]”

            You either know something we don’t, or are talking nonsense.

          • Simon says:

            Sounds like Jewish bravado to me. “Pointed in the other direction”, LOL.

          • B says:

            Pdimov-

            Your link says “none of the S-300 versions have ever fired a missile in a real conflict”.

            The way SEAD works today relies heavily on electronic warfare. Therefore, the more information you can gather about enemy SAM systems, the more effective your SEAD. One of the ways of gathering information on SAMs is by analyzing their radar signals and communications, which is obviously easier if those missiles are next door than in Novosibirsk.

            Obviously, “pointed in a different direction” means that these missiles are targeting Turkish aircraft, and their deployment is directed at Turkey.

  10. […] on NATO shooting down a Russian jet and murdering the pilot. Related: The NATO-ISIS […]

  11. […] has full coverage on the NATO downing of the Russian fighter jet. And, by the way, how we know Yes, the US did treacherously stab Russia in the back over […]

Leave a Reply