Turkey strikes targets in Syria in retaliation for shelling deaths - CNN.com
Is that making the 'December 2012' to get just a bit closer or:
"A senior U.S. defense official said the Pentagon is watching the situation with some degree of concern, "but at this point, there's nothing to suggest it's going to become a broader conflict."
What do you think? (Ideally, anything else other than "The US is looking for the ways to invade Syria" or alike).
Вы требуете невозможного.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Хотя скажу. Обстрел турецкой деревни – провокация со стороны Турции для оправдания более активного вмешательства в войну в Сирии.
1) Провокация не нужна. Достаточно просто дождаться шального снаряда.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus
2) По-моему, этот снаряд Турции выгоден. Теперь у неё развязаны руки. И Западу выгоден. Так как Турция - это агент Запада. И Крокодилу выгоден. Так как он агент Запада. (Агент - это тот, кто действует в чьих-то интересах).
3) Сирия конечно не хочет войны с Турцией или кем-то ещё. Надо быть самоубийцей чтобы в сложной ситуации хотеть ещё повоевать и с регулярными войсками соседних государств. Тем более, что у Турции очень многочисленная армия.
I'm not just a Western agent, I'm also paid by the West, so I'm a paid agent! :D (I'm paid to do other things, but it's the West which pays me. So, we all know whoever pays, dictates what to do... :D )Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
In investigation practice, the approach of "who benefits" is valid only to define a circle of the suspects and nothing more. However, when used outside of the applicability context, the "who benefits" becomes a powerful weapon of a propaganda to blame your political opponents of just about anything that happens. No proof is ever required.
I agree to some extent. However, the problem with those kind of claims is that you can make that claim the other way around. For example: Syrian government wants to get rid of the insurgents, so it provokes Turkey thus putting the insurgents into the political situation in which they collaborate with the enemy. And that can significantly hit the motivation of the insurgents as well as the civilians who help them maybe causing their forces to split and thus weaken. "All Syrians, unite to fight the common enemy - Turkey!! They want our land and they want to kill our people and rape our women!! If you are a patriot, join the Army and fight Turkey with us!" ;) That will not result with the war with Turkey (the UN Security Council will not let that happen), but it might effectively end the insurgence and make Assad be the leader of the nation again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
It is exactly because that logic (i.e. "who benefits") can go any way you want, it is LOVED by propaganda (and is strictly avoided by me outside of the applicability context). So, being the smart and the honest guy as you are, I think you would appreciate that and do the same thing. ;)
То, что повстанцы получают всестороннюю помощь от Турции, всем в Сирии очевидно.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
And, again the same "propaganda magic" can be applied the other way around: the fact that Assad's regime is being supported by Iran is obvious to anyone in Syria. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Marcus
Also: Lebanon news - NOW Lebanon -Iran assisted Syria to relocate chemical weapons, Al-Arabiya leaks reveal
You see? If you talk propaganda with me, I can easily talk propaganda back, because propaganda exists for each and every situation for any side you like. There's nothing to think about. ;) I'm used to share my own thoughts (be them maybe 100% wrong), but when I ask others and they get back to me with propaganda I feel like :bad:. If I need to read propaganda I know where to find it. I'm curious to know what do you think of that?
Я тоже высказываю свои мысли, а не пропаганду.
So, how do you know what is obvious for Syrians and what is not? And what that "obvious" has to do with the rest of the topic?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus
Assad had already explicitly said, he would attack Israel if NATO would intervene, right? And if that happens, Israel will retaliate which could spin things out of control, right? So, what interest NATO (i.e. one of their member - Turkey) would have in attacking Syria?! Speaking of the benefits, it is much more beneficial for NATO to sit quiet, talking about the 'freedom fighters' (and maybe even helping them with weapons like you said) waiting for the "freedom" to slowly take effect, as it is happening today, than fire any kind of weapon towards Syria! Why to start stirring if Syria would be yours from within in a matter of months?! It is Assad's government which needs to do anything extraordinary to save his butt. On the contrary, the US is trying to play down the incident: "but at this point, there's nothing to suggest it's going to become a broader conflict."
So, what "impossible" had I asked?! Why to blame the US government again?! What makes the thoughts like: "Обстрел турецкой деревни – провокация со стороны Турции для оправдания более активного вмешательства в войну в Сирии" yours?! Can you really think that way? I'm pretty sure you haven't thought a second before writing that purely propagandistic point. It just came out naturally without any thinking as it would for anybody who is heavily influenced by propaganda. And that is a pity.
Besides, all I asked in my original question was whether this conflict would escalate or not. There was nothing impossible to answer without blaming the US government again, wasn't it? I'm looking for your thoughts on that matter...
Наверное на первом же занятии агентам Запада рассказывают об этом способе ухода от угрозы раскрытия: сразу признаться, но перевести всё в шутку.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
А я предполагаю другую логику. Бандам в Сирии очень трудно. Им очень нужна прямая военная поддержка (интервеция) стран Запада. Поэтому они сами стреляют в сторону Турции, организовывая провокации.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Нет стран, переступающих через Совет Безопасности в вопросах войны? Есть НАТО, есть США, есть Турция. Им нужен только повод, чтобы сохранить хорошую мину при плохой игре. Совбез им пока мешает, но если надо они об него ноги вытрут.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
I cannot see how this or anything similar could bring "the December 2012" around. That dictator is pretty much similar to the former Lybian one, and he's obviously going to end up like him, be it international forces or his own people from inside the country, that will put him down. But that's it, just another stinky dictatorship erased from the world, it'll hardly lead to collapse of anything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
What about the dictatorship in the U.S.?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
So, if a 'major super power' arms rebels, you are supposed to lean over? Both groups are vicious to one another, the difference is one is supported by all the globalists.
So, Assad will attack with some rockets when the rest are all against him?
I guess you guys think the 'international intervention' in Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, et al. have all been successes, right?!? LOL!
I can't say they were successes, many ppl died in that hell, etc. But what I was saying was that whatever way the events in Syria go, they'll hardly bring some sort of "global collapse" or anything. And I think the dictator won't really have guts to go with a rocket strike while busy defending his ass against the people.Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
Well, as far as I know, Gaddafi did not have the weapons with the proper range to attack Israel and Assad does. In that case, Israel would retaliate, Iran would intervene as promised, China would intervene, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
Here's what I was thinking... There's a great chance Israel would be pressed not to retaliate the same way it was pressed not to reply to Hussen's missiles in 1991. So, this time Israel would say: "Oh, so Turkey could reply and we cannot?!" I'm thinking that was the reason for shelling Turkey. To make a close precedent.
Does that sound a bit more serious now?
Wow! You have also figured out about our top secret Зе Скул?! You know too much, my friend... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Ok, let's assume you're right. Imagine you and me are the two field commanders of the Syrian opposition. Both of us are meeting at the dawn, dressed up in dirty and wet camouflage, surrounded by our best people. Everybody is tired and angry: it has been a very tough night - we were escorting the weaponry and ammo delivered by a Turkish guy named Murat. We don't know how he gets the weapons, but the rumors have it - the guy is stealing the weapon from the Turkish army and sells it for the relatively cheap. We can't pay more anyways. The following conversation takes place:Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
(Crocodile) - Man, my people are tired. It's getting worse and worse. First, those bastards killed Hossein and his brother Sаddam, and now about the quarter of my group are sick. The motivation is low. What do you think we should do?
(Юрка) - I have a brilliant idea. Let's fire a couple of shells towards Turkish villages and kill a dozen of villagers! That way Turkey would intervene in our war against the bastards, oust Assad and hand us the power!
- Are you out of your mind? What's going to happen is Murat would kill us all the very next time we show up to get more ammo!
- You have never been smart, Crocodile. You just don't understand where the weapon is coming from. It is actually the US paying for all the weapon and the ammo we get and Murat is just an agent of the US because he acts the way that benefits the US. So, the US can see we're tired and in order to help us they are only looking for us to provoke Turkey, so Turkey could have legal ground to start war against Syria. Assad, that is. They will not touch us for sure. Instead, they would give us the power to reign once they are finished.
- How do you know all that stuff, Юрка? Do you have a crystal ball?
- You're young and don't have much experience like me.
- You know, if you want to be crazy and kill yourself this very exotic way, it's your right. But, I don't want Turkish coming to kill, rob, and rape whoever they see fit because I was an officer in the Syrian army, so I don't let you do that!!
(The fire exchange starts.)
Can you see your assumption is rather close to absurd in practice?
You know what the Iranian dictator said of the Lybian one as the latter was shot? Something like "every dictator is going to end up like that". That's to mean, he may sound tough but he doesn't have really serious background to play a "hero" and mess with NATO and their allies, and his fear sometimes reaches a point when he even has to verbally back up. As for China, that sounds even crazier - why in the first place would a country join an armed conflict going on thousands of miles away, and having absolutely nothing to do with it? Just for fun? But fun isn't what drives politics stuff, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
I think it is safe to assume that for many Russians you will be a "Western spy" and for many North Americans you will be a Russian spy and even if you climb up on the CN Tower and scream that you are not a spy - it's not gonna change a thing :) I guess they might think the same about me :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
People are victims of propaganda :)
But what person can be both an American and a Russian spy at the same time? =)Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomer
Any, depends on amount of propaganda :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
Турки сами могли подсказать "сирийской оппозиции": "ребята, стрельните вот сюда. Много народу не убъёте, а повод вам помочь дадите". Вы что, не знаете что такое провокация? Немцы не пожалели свой Рейхстаг, чтобы обвинить коммунистов. А тут максимум - кого-то из крестьян заденет. Я уверен, что политики в Турции - это не ангелы, а люди, умеющие жертвовать (особенно, если жертвовать нужно не собой).Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Ну, если агент Запада говорит, что версия абсурдна, значит ей можно верить. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Which is ok by me as I realize I'm just another victim of the same thing. :D But that is ok as long as they realize we are all victims and they are also ready to open their mind and start having their own thoughts. Otherwise, there could be no conversation, but exchange of propaganda. Such "conversations" could not go anywhere other than offending each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomer
Of course not. But if an agent of the East is saying it's true, that you can believe. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
See? There's neither end nor conclusion to that kind of argumentation. ;)
Ok, I know what is provocation. Among the other things, provocation is something that works either way. If a round is landed on Akcakale, that is clearly a provocation. But, whose provocation is that? You're saying it was the opposition's provocation. Somebody could say, it was Assad's provocation. Someone else could say, it was Turkish provocation (yes, deploy some special Turkish troops across the border and fire their own town from Syria's border). Just to name a few: there could also be Iran's provocation, the US provocation, France provocation, China's provocation, and the last but not the least, the Antarctic penguins' provocation. There's no end to that and it could be twisted any way you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
In my opinion, if those shells came not from the Syrian army loyal to Assad, there should be official denial and denouncing of the incident by Damascus. Walid al-Moualem should hold a press conference and clearly say something like: "Look, guys, it's not us, somebody's trying to provoke the war between Syria and Turkey." Was there that kind of response by the Syrian government or I'm missing something?
In general, I agree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
I see your point. The problem is Iran already military helping Assad's government: Iran confirms it has forces in Syria and will take military action if pushed | World news | The GuardianQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
"Iran has confirmed for the first time that forces from its revolutionary guards corps (IRGC) are in Syria helping Bashar al-Assad's government crush rebels, and warned that it would get involved militarily if its Arab ally came under attack."
Well, there are lots of precedents to that. The US came to be involved with a Civil War in Afghanistan! What had the US to do with who among the various tribes would control the other tribes?! Afghanistan is a very poor country. There's no oil in Afghanistan. Just for fun? Maybe, to catch Bin Laden? Have the US caught Bin Laden in Afghanistan, after all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
I'm not 100% sure what China has to do with Iran (the slightly cheaper oil or reliable oil supply, maybe?), but they have clearly stated their military support. If you know Chinese, they are not just talkative for fun..
Ха-ха. Да, пропустили. Информационную войну Запада против Сирии.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Запад сначала заткнул Сирии рот, а потом жалуется, что нет информации из Сирии. Ну, не лицемерие?.. :)
That is a pure propaganda. On October 2, 2012 Walid al-Moualem is able to convey his message that "the United States and its allies support terrorism in his country" Syria says US and allies support terrorism - Middle East - Al Jazeera English and when it comes to the shelling on October 4, 2012 he is suddenly quiet? The shelling is going on for a week and there was no way to even slip a short message like that through the cracks? That you blame on the information war?Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
"А чей это сайт?.." That is Al Jazeera, my friend, and not the BBC. :D Now, an intelligent guy like you (the school medals, the corporation, etc.) has nothing but to start making stuff up to support your point.. A real pity.. ;)
Propaganda is like a religion of a kind. If it can't explain something, it appeals to you with: "JUST BELIEVE! The explanation will come later!" ;)
1) Я видел программы русского телевидения из Сирии, в которых сирийцы пытаются докричаться до мира при помощи нашего телеканала. Потому что нет других средств.
2) Аль Джазира - по вашим понятиям это образец независимости и объективности? А по-моему, нет.
Вот Вы на меня уже и досье завели. Ну, точно агент. Там стоит пометка "годится для вербовки"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
I'm not sure this situation is very clear because there is so much lying, manipulation and media spin going on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
I just thought of presenting a point and you can beat it down or whatever you want. I am not interested in getting involved in another argument. But, I did come across someplace claims that Turkey was arming and/or training Syrian rebels and that the shelling was a response or reaction to this. So, just to speak on the hypothetical, what if this is part of the reason. It's not being reported. But, if Assad does try to claim this, then this should be included in any discussion.
It's peculiar that Syria (as bad and rogue a state as it is) cannot be left to its own devices in a civil war and when Iran is supposedly helping, it's condemned, too.
Yet, the U.S. can bomb the crap out of other countries AND INTERFERE with impunity. It's always one side and the media always portrays the U.S./NATO or whoever as one that cannot be beneath anything whereas it's Iran/Syria/whoever they want as the guilty one. It's funny how everyone immediately takes it as gospel.
Anyway, carry on...
Could you be kind enough a provide a link to Russian media which report that Syrian government officially denounce the shelling?Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Your approach "А чей это сайт?.." implies you don't believe any media could be objective and independent. Which is ok as long as we have what the other party has to say, so we could compare. Al Jazeera has a long-established history of publishing anti-Western and anti-US opinions, so I'm not sure what you want to say here. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
And I would appreciate to consider that. But, at this time, there's nothing coming from Damascus that addresses the shelling. We are left with making up any reason we see fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
But, I think you missed the point of my conversation with Юрка. He actually claims that the shelling was done by the Syrian opposition to provoke Turkey/NATO and not by the Syrian Army (whatever justified reason they might have).
No, I noticed that. Well, from what I could translate. I think it's plausible but I am not making any conclusions yet. But, then questions have to be answered, right? Do they have the firepower etc. Because, I think it's pretty easy to answer the why. Anyway, I have not investigated or researched this topic sufficiently. I thought it is interesting that other nations are not allowed to intervene but the U.S./NATO can do as they see fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Well, we all know, whoever has the might, has the right. It's not a big deal to find the justification. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
Крокодил, мы с вами стратеги или бухгалтера?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
Неужели что-то зависит от одной ссылки?
Восток - дело тонкое. На Востоке не всегда стереотип поведения совпадает с тем, что ожидают в западном филиале западного мира. Они извинились перед Турцией, а Вы: "Неееет! Где осуждение?!! У нас принято осуждение!".
А извинение в данном случае - это более высокий и мужской поступок, чем осуждение. Извинение означает не перенос ответственности на кого-то, а признание ответственности за всё, что происходит на территории своей страны. Даже если стреляли бандиты, с которыми Сирия борется.
Осуждение - это более мелкий поступок, который относится скорее к сфере внутренней политики: поймали и осудили. А извинение - это больше подходит к международным делам.
У вас страна молодая и поэтому очень смутное представление о морали в международных делах. Иногда полная "каша". А на Востоке этикет в таких делах на высшем уровне. Учитесь, а не учите.
Если брать аналог из человеческих отношений, то на Востоке мужчина извинится за плохой поступок своей жены, но не скажет "я её осуждаю, не имею с ней ничего общего, бейте её кто хочет".
И ещё аналог: большевики заставляли отрекаться от родственников, публично осуждать их. Все должны были быть как Павлик Морозов. И ваше мышление (наших эмигрантов из СССР) похоже на большевистское.
Ah, now you're talking! They not only apologized but took the responsibility for the shelling! Syria Formally Apologizes for Cross-Border Shelling into Turkey -- News from Antiwar.comQuote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Let's put aside the question of had it happen again despite the apologies since October 4, and focus on our main topic. So, if you admit Syria apologized that means you admit Syria was responsible and not the Syrian opposition!! So, what were all those previous posts of yours about? Just to confuse us? Propaganda, my friend, is so propaganda.. ;)Quote:
Turkey’s deputy prime minister on Thursday said Syria has admitted it was responsible for the shelling that killed five civilians in Turkey on Wednesday and has formally apologized for the deaths. The regime of Bashar al-Assad not only issued a formal apology, says Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Besir Atalay, but it reassured the United Nations that “such an incident will not occur again.”
I don't know who are you, but I'm just a simple-minded crocodile. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Well, you mentioned Assad's government used Russian media allegedly [due to the information war of the West against Syria] there were blocked to deliver official message they are not responsible for the shelling. So, yes, a couple of links to support what you said would be enough. Unfortunately, you haven't provided any. Which makes me think there's none and you said the things you said just for making up some argument. Demagogy, my friend, is so demagogy.. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
I might have tentatively accepted what you say if I hadn't known a bit about the Middle East. Actually, among the people it works a totally different way: they can say whatever, regardless if that's true or false, just to convince you at this very moment. Not thinking about the future and the consequences. Words do not matter. Words mean nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Now, when talking about the foreign affairs, both Syria and Turkey comply with the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations. Hence, their foreign affairs are guided by the same exact principles as the other countries, including Canada.
Unfortunately, that seems like demagogy to me. We're talking about the international affairs, which have rather strict rules. Also, like I said earlier, I'm not sure you know the Middle Eastern culture well enough. Maybe, you made that conclusion when talking with Osetians or Chechens. So, be it known to you those are rather different cultures, even though they are all Muslim countries. Whatever works in the mountains does not necessarily work in the desert and oasis (and the other way around). ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Assume you're right. So, what holds Syria from doing the smaller thing if it had already done a bigger one? Maybe, just to satisfy small and shallow creatures like myself [and as a side effect some not-so-manly Vienna Diplomatic Conventions]. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Ok.. here propaganda goes again.. At least, he could say it was his wife and not him! And that he does not like either what she did! How difficult was that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
Besides, I can do the same thing as yours appealling to emotions, but the other way around. Following your analogy with a wife, it's going to be a wife which the super-manly man of yours is killing and torturing. So, the wife knocks on the common wall with the neighbors in a desperate gesture of: "Please, help me, this guy is killing me!" and the framed picture falls down on the other side of the wall. The angry neighbours are coming: "Why are you knocking on the wall?" The super-manly man replies: "Oh, I apologize, it was me, I take the responsibility. This will not happen again." How attractive that super-manly man of yours is now? :D
The next time you're invited to the Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations, tell them those very things. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Юрка
What propaganda are you talking about, Crocodile?
Syria Did not Apologize to Turkey: Al-Jaafari
Turkey says Syria apologized via U.N. for shelling | Reuters
Austrian Newspaper Apologizes for Fake Syria Photo
I admit I am not sufficiently up-to-date on this issue but sirens go off when the U.S. is able to pressure all these other countries to gang up on another one. Even if you think Assad is the worst dictator in the world, you seem to reach conclusions very quickly.
Most people do. But, there's a lot of examples of spin and lies so I think it's best to reserve judgement. Imho, the BS about Libya and Iraq showed an example of how powerful the media is and how things can be spun one way to obtain a desired situation.
I guess that is why one can have a leaning towards a perspective but (I am) still reserve judgement until obtaining more info.
Ok, now that is interesting. Turkey is saying Syria apologized and Syria is saying it did not apologize. That looks to me like the real Middle Eastern politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian
Вести.Ru: Сирийские боевики обстреляли Турцию из натовского оружия
Об обстреле турецкой территории из натовского оружия.
Стопроцентное разоблачение, ага. Жаль лишь, что газета "Юрд" забыла рассказать, что на войне бывает т.н. "трофейное оружие" и источники его происхождения всем известны.. :DQuote:
В субботу турецкая газета "Юрд" сообщила, что тогда минометный обстрел был произведен снарядами, которые может выпускать только установка натовского образца. У сирийских военных таких установок никогда не было, зато, указывает издание, они есть у боевиков так называемой "Сирийской свободной армии". Стоит отметить, что поставила им его сама же Турция. Таким образом, в гибели пяти турок точно не виноват Башар Асад и верные ему солдаты. Реакции Анкары на разоблачительную публикацию пока не поступало.
Короче, вот про это всё я и говорил. Боюсь, что конфликт может начать выходить за пределы Сирии. :(
Marcus, can you respond? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crocodile
It sounds like what Crocodile is saying that the NATO weapons were captured?!? Of course, that would be major news and all over the mainstream sites. I guess I suddenly lost the ability to use google because I couldn't find any hits.
Or perhaps, it is Syrian rebels (also called terrorists) who were given NATO weapons to shell Turkey with? Then it could all be blamed on Assad's army. It sounds just as plausible.
SYRIA | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
Edit: Ok, found at least one:
http://www.examiner.com/article/syri...boxes-damascus
But, does it prove that the perpetrators were of the army or rebels?
Yes, he said it could happen.Quote:
It sounds like what Crocodile is saying that the NATO weapons were captured?!?
Yeah, like I said, it proves nothing. Anybody could fire NATO weapons be it Syrian Army, Syrian opposition, or Turkish Army. All I said was a comment to "разоблачительную публикацию" in the cited source. I think, there is nothing "unmasking". I'll give you an example from another Middle Eastern country nearby. There must be a certain amount of Soviet-produced weapons captured by Israel during its wars. So, if somebody opened fire towards Syrian positions from Israel with some Soviet-made weapons, what you be able to comletely rule out Israeli Army provoking Syria? And call such incident "unmasking"? The "unmasking" works subconsiously to shift the focus the certain biased way. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Russian