Turkey and Russia vs ISIS

Putin: ISIS financed from 40 countries, including G20 members

https://www.rt.com/news/322305-isis-financed-40-countries/


That bit isn't surprising at all, what IS surprising that those putin quotes didn't make it to an UK media outlet at all

Putin is accusing Turkey of actively supporting Daesh after they downed a Russian Jet.

Let's hope this incident does not escalate further, this is the last thing we need right now.

Turkey is doing more than the entire West put together

But Putin is our saviour because he's supporting Assad (:

Turkey should have chilled. Airspace is important, but surely they and Russia are on the same side in this?

Not really. Russia isn't so much attacking ISIS as supporting Assad, which means killing anyone who opposes him (hundreds of thousands of innocents). Good riddance IMO. One less fighter to bomb civilians.

Yeah, the way I've got it is that Russia supports Assad (at least for now) while Turkey is against him.

But probably not the right thread for this talk anyway.

Cruijf wrote:Not really. Russia isn't so much attacking ISIS as supporting Assad, which means killing anyone who opposes him (hundreds of thousands of innocents). Good riddance IMO. One less fighter to bomb civilians.

Isn't supporting Assad the same as attacking Isis since that is the end game?

Just seems like a short sighted move by Turkey. Air borders are important, but Russia is using their money to kind of help you out. Especially if Russians are also bombing Kurds.

Betty La Fea wrote:

Cruijf wrote:Not really. Russia isn't so much attacking ISIS as supporting Assad, which means killing anyone who opposes him (hundreds of thousands of innocents). Good riddance IMO. One less fighter to bomb civilians.

Isn't supporting Assad the same as attacking Isis since that is the end game?

No, besides Assad and ISIS there are rebel groups who are against both and generally supported by the U.S. And Russia is allegedly bombing these rebels as well as ISIS. Turkey also sympathizes with at least some of these rebel groups.

Art Morte wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

Cruijf wrote:Not really. Russia isn't so much attacking ISIS as supporting Assad, which means killing anyone who opposes him (hundreds of thousands of innocents). Good riddance IMO. One less fighter to bomb civilians.

Isn't supporting Assad the same as attacking Isis since that is the end game?

No, besides Assad and ISIS there are rebel groups who are against both and generally supported by the U.S. And Russia is allegedly bombing these rebels as well as ISIS. Turkey also sympathizes with at least some of these rebel groups.

Turkey sympathizing shouldn't be reason for doing a jet from a nation they are supposedly friendly with. I hope they know what they are doing.

Some of those rebels Turkey regards as pretty much their own people, like Russia does with Crimea and some Ukrainians who feel more Russian than Ukrainian. And that's where Russia stepped in with military force, so they should have few complaints if Turkey supports some of the Syrian rebels militarily as well.

Well yeah that, and the fact that the rebels are by far the least evil of all the factions in this conflict. The fact that Russia is bombing them is unforgivable, and I don't blame Turkey for taking this chance to send a message. This isn't about airspace. It's about telling Russia that supporting Assad is just as bad as supporting ISIS (maybe even worse).

Or simply the duplicitous behavior by Turkey is really unbearable  and  harmful.
They look like Pakistan who  with one hand alliances with West and with the other one subsidizes the Talibans.

We know what the Russians were doing ... bombing the anti-Assad rebels.



I feel the Turkey was expecting the first good chance to break a Russian airplane.

Man we(humanity) are dangerously flirting with a world war.

I would sleep much better if Turkey weren't a NATO country, because of two reasons:
1) If they go tango with Russia, NATO really might have to step in entirely
2) Any action by Turkey might be perceived as endorsed by NATO by Russia

Turkey is not just anti-Asad. They have been actively supporting ISIS since its inception. They are the biggest purchasers of ISIS oil. They are the main route ISIS fighters have been going through to get to Syria. And along with this, they have been constantly bombing the (US and Europe supported) Kurds, who are the only effective group in the region fighting against ISIS.

Why Turkey is still a NATO member and an "ally" to the States and Europe is beyond me.

Turkey is rated as an ally very important and irreproachable
.
For me , it  was a bit worrying to note -  less than an hour after the attack -  the English Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond got going with defending energetically Erdogan because " he is a fundamental NATO ally who holds the key to a number of important questions ( isis, migrations , partner for EU   )  etc "

Europe is willing to do anything to keep the Syrian refugees in Turkey  ...... even if it means to buy oil extracted by Daesh....

Obama also said immediately for first thing that Turkey has the right to defend itself , this was  already a clear orientation ... my the feeling given by  Obama was  a "with Turkey no ifs, ands, or buts "

Basically being against Turkey means being against Nato , plain and simple.

Betty La Fea wrote:Turkey should have chilled. Airspace is important, but surely they and Russia are on the same side in this?

Nope, Diavolo's post sums it up perfectly.

Il Diavolo wrote:Turkey is not just anti-Asad. They have been actively supporting ISIS since its inception. They are the biggest purchasers of ISIS oil. They are the main route ISIS fighters have been going through to get to Syria. And along with this, they have been constantly bombing the (US and Europe supported) Kurds, who are the only effective group in the region fighting against ISIS.

Why Turkey is still a NATO member and an "ally" to the States and Europe is beyond me.

Turkey supporting ISIS

Provide sources or pls go.

Cruijf wrote:Turkey supporting ISIS

Provide sources or pls go.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/research-paper-isis-turke_b_6128950.html

Disappointed in the Huffington Post tbh, that's some low level journalism.

The evidence presented can be sorted into a few categories:

1. Accusations by opposition politicians, whose only evidence is "everyone knows" Turkey supports ISIS
2. ISIS fighters. Shouldn't have to explain why this is irrelevant. If anything it's evidence in favor of Turkey
3. Referencing recruits for ISIS coming from Turkey. Recruits also come from US. Doesn't mean US supports ISIS.
4. Ridiculously unfounded conjecture. They say this:

"I was shocked to hear words of admiration for ISIL from some high-level civil servants even in Şanliurfa. 'They are like us, fighting against seven great powers in the War of Independence,' one said." "Rather than the [Kurdistan Workers' Party] PKK on the other side, I would rather have ISIL as a neighbor," said another."

This 'civil servant' is unnamed and no source is provided

In short, this "research paper" resembles a 9/11 truther blog post more than anything academic.

And even if some of the stuff is slightly disturbing, like the amount of ISIS fighters that do come through Turkey, there is absolutely no solid evidence (at least in that article) that suggests Turkey is for ISIS. The evidence we do have suggests Turkey has been fighting ISIS since its inception, and has done more to push them back than the West.

And even if you're completely convinced Turkey has all of NATO fooled and is actually an evil mastermind behind all of this, keep in mind Russia has not so much as lifted a finger to stop ISIS. All of their attacks have been focused on the rebels. So there's nothing to suggest they are the 'good guys' here.

http://www.businessinsider.com/links-between-turkey-and-isis-are-now-undeniable-2015-7

It's obviously not a 1+1=2 matter, and I cannot definitely prove anything. And arguing over it is pointless as well.

And who are these rebels you are referring to that Russia is bombing? ISIS was referred to as rebels as well back when the west was arming them to fight against Asad. Not sure how deep an understanding you have of the politics of the region, but this idea of these "good" rebel groups that are anti-ISIS and anti-Asad is BS.

The only local group that we know for sure is putting up a good fight against ISIS are the Kurds. Who Turkey has been openly bombing (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/28/turkey-erdogan-not-possible-peace-process-kurdish-militants).

That's an article in July claiming that the US has found evidence (that they don't share) so damning their relationship with Turkey won't be the same. So why is Obama backing Turkey in this Russia incident in November?

I agree that Syria is a mess. No one knows for sure who is who and who is fighting who and who is supported by who. From what we know however, there are several rebel groups who started as peaceful protestors against Assad and were forced to become militants in response to Assad killing thousands of them. These rebels are still fighting Assad and only Assad, not targeting civilians like ISIS, and these are the rebels that Russia is targeting. Rebels, I should reiterate, that are no more than regular people who were forced to either fight, flee, or die. No doubt these are the people the West should have supported from the offset, and these are the people that Turkey are supporting.

Cruijf wrote:That's an article in July claiming that the US has found evidence (that they don't share) so damning their relationship with Turkey won't be the same. So why is Obama backing Turkey in this Russia incident in November?

If only global politics was so simply black and white and not the extremely complex mess it is.

and these are the people that Turkey are supporting

Like the Kurds?

Kurds is another issue

Kurds have always been marginalized in Turkey, and even though this government has helped them significantly and helped them form their own party, the PKK is a militant group that has attacked Turkey numerous times. So even though they are fighting ISIS (and doing a damn good job), Turkey has to oppose them because of the things they've done domestically. It would be like US supporting Al-Qaeda.

Every other rebel group Turkey is supporting however, and they have fought ISIS themselves as well.

I don't know about Turkey backing the IS;
First off, I don't think the evidence is convincing. On the other hand, it's a lot of accusations being repeated a lot, so while that in itself doesn't prove anything, it does make me curious.

I'm torn:
1) Erdogan is a grade A dickbag, an utter twat, a menace to democracy and the scourge of the Turkish people, who are not only proud, but also have steadily progressed towards peace, prosperity, and liberty for the past few decades, so obviously I think Erdogan is doing something heinous at any given time.
1.1.) I totally think Erdogan would be stupid/self-serving enough to back ISIS just to f*ck with the Kurds, not even because he hates the Kurds that much (though he seems to do that), but because it distracts the populace from the fact he's starting to dismantle both democracy and seperation of church and state in Turkey.

On the other hand there's
2) Even Erdogan must be clear on the fact that Turkey must in the long run be a massive target for ISIS. It's a nation characterized by a very, very laid-back version of Islam, with lots of Alewites as well, and if those ISIS assholes have a rage-boner for anything, it's killing muslims that aren't 100% in agreement with their particular brand of radical islamism.

2.2.) I really think, leaky as Turkey is, that a lot of what has been levied in accusations might just be ineptitude to keep the borders closed, and local officials being easy to bribe. So they might be "supporting ISIS" the same way the US is "supporting Mexican drug cartels" by semi-accidentally supporting guns.