# Russia/Turkey/Syria/Iran/SaudiArabia War



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

I havn't seen any threads on this but it seems that the next few days, over the next week or so will be critical in determining if Syria will continue as an open contest. Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been floating comments about going into Syria, but I have my doubts.

With Oil prices so low, you would think Saudi Arabia, Iran and Russia would love to have a war in the region if it wasn't so damaging that they didn't profit from the spike in oil prices? Any thoughts on this, do you think it is possible Turkey will go head on with Russia and Iran, it seems doubtful.

Anyone with thoughts on this.


----------



## Mosinator762x54r (Nov 4, 2015)

We have been at war since 2010 during the first attempt to overtake Assad and the saran gas debauchery by the Obama regime.



neonoah said:


> War is coming, some say it has already begun over syria. My thoughts are trrifyingly biblical "...there shall not be one stone left standing on another..." or close anyway.
> Looking to supply our guys with good things or end up starving like lots of other all-race, all-class people are. If guys that pull 400k a year say "No man, they're after us all" that sets a pretty high bar to make this cut.
> Hoping for the best tho!


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

OPEC is driving down the price of oil, Russia is propping up Assad's regime, and Turkey loses it's NATO Allies if it attacks instead of being attacked. What was the question again?


----------



## I'd_last_a_day (May 12, 2015)

You guys really need to stop obsessing over the petty stuff and focus on more important things! The racism with the Oscars, the hate speach against Muslims, and the need for Americans to be disarmed so that murders will grind to a screetching halt.


----------



## Mosinator762x54r (Nov 4, 2015)

Turkey is really swinging violently lately from one end of the spectrum to the other. It's really hard to get a read on that situation. They shoot down Russian planes, they buy ISIS oil, they kill the Persh Merga, they have their capital bombed. I mean...it's just really a strange situation trying to figure out what's going on there. I really get the feeling something stupid is going to happen in Turkey and then all hell breaks loose.



M118LR said:


> OPEC is driving down the price of oil, Russia is propping up Assad's regime, and Turkey loses it's NATO Allies if it attacks instead of being attacked. What was the question again?


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Turkey is swinging violently, or is it just the Mass Media Reports?


----------



## Mosinator762x54r (Nov 4, 2015)

Good point. Could be both. It's difficult to fake a downed Russian jet.


M118LR said:


> Turkey is swinging violently, or is it just the Mass Media Reports?


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Mosinator762x54r said:


> Good point. Could be both. It's difficult to fake a downed Russian jet.


Russia isn't a member of NATO is it? The trigger would trip if a Russian jet dropped it's payload on Turkey? But Turkey wouldn't complain if Russia wiped out all the Kurdish support that America is getting from just across the border? Need we forget that ISIS wants the entire area to go up in an apocalyptic fulfillment of the Koran's Scriptures. If we could be ensured that all the Waddist Muslims were in the area I wouldn't be opposed to giving them an apocalyptic glass enshrinement.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

I have always said WWIII would start in the middle east. To many players involved and to much firepower. One ship, one plane, one wrong target, one misinterpreted action. Wars have started for a lot less. Saber rattling, political realignment, troop movements, reinforcing positions ( Europe ), small limited engagements. A lot to keep an eye on. Funny, the boob in the White House said just last month all was well.


----------



## Doc Holliday (Dec 22, 2012)

The US should be the first to bomb Turkey. They are supplying money, food and logistics to ISIS. Kick them the H3LL out of NATO!


----------



## Labello (Jan 31, 2016)

I totally agree with you. Maybe the WW III has begun. Few days ago, economists predict the worst economic crisis , worse than 2008.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Profits of doom are a dime a dozen, Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread, those that have to sacrifice their lives ask only that it be worth it. Would you care to opine as to why I should give of my blood or life to destroy a US Ally?


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

Well considering a quarter of a million people have already died in Syria and Millions in Iraq, (With many millions more refugees) I can only guess that there are some pretty pissed off people in the middle east right now, who are already at war. Its just the people who have been on the sidelines doing proxy wars are increasingly getting involved and now NATO and Suadia Arabia have said if the truce that is suppose to kickin in a week or so (by March 1st maybe) not really believable, because Russia and Syria have said they will keep fighting Al Nusra and ISIS, but the US / Turkey / NATO has said that its only OK to fight ISIS not Al Nusra. As such the truce will not hold on that basis. Saudi Arabia has said they will move in ground troops to fight ISIS as a result, I don't understand how this would happen though, Turkey has also been making comments regarding continued attacks resulting in them intervening but again I don't see how that will happen. As such it seems like NATO is being delegated on this unless they want to risk a larger war, and it seems that Syria will be retaken no pun by Syria as a result.

I think that if this escalates it will be a big deal. As Syria has already said if Saudi Arabia brings in ground tropps Syria will send them home in body bags.

Interesting dynamic none the less oil rose 12% today/yesterday.

Eagerly awaiting to see what next week and the week approaching March 1st brings. As Spring is almost upon us.. March 21st.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Will2 said:


> Well considering a quarter of a million people have already died in Syria and Millions in Iraq, (With many millions more refugees) I can only guess that there are some pretty pissed off people in the middle east right now, who are already at war. Its just the people who have been on the sidelines doing proxy wars are increasingly getting involved and now NATO and Suadia Arabia have said if the truce that is suppose to kickin in a week or so (by March 1st maybe) not really believable, because Russia and Syria have said they will keep fighting Al Nusra and ISIS, but the US / Turkey / NATO has said that its only OK to fight ISIS not Al Nusra. As such the truce will not hold on that basis. Saudi Arabia has said they will move in ground troops to fight ISIS as a result, I don't understand how this would happen though, Turkey has also been making comments regarding continued attacks resulting in them intervening but again I don't see how that will happen. As such it seems like NATO is being delegated on this unless they want to risk a larger war, and it seems that Syria will be retaken no pun by Syria as a result.
> 
> I think that if this escalates it will be a big deal. As Syria has already said if Saudi Arabia brings in ground tropps Syria will send them home in body bags.
> 
> ...


Your lack of knowledge on the geographical aspects of the Middle East can only be accentuated by the time you have not spent on the RISK game-board. But Saudia Arabia isn't a NATO Member. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_country_codes) As to your already at War statement, could you reflect upon what time since Mosses entered the area that the Middle East hasn't been at War? Should Turkey move into the role of an aggressor, all NATO Pacts are null and void. As to the rise in oil prices, what was the landing date of the first American Oil Export ship launched by NYSE COP? What truce has ISIS been any part of. Extermination shall be ISIS's role within history, not to mention the defamation of history by the sorry individuals that cling to thier dogma. JMHO


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

M118LR said:


> Your lack of knowledge on the geographical aspects of the Middle East can only be accentuated by the time you have not spent on the RISK game-board.


what?



> But Saudia Arabia isn't a NATO Member.


ok, and what is your point?

Also it is "Saudi" Arabia.. not Saudia .... just a tip on that one.



> As to your already at War statement, could you reflect upon what time since Mosses entered the area that the Middle East hasn't been at War?


 Never. There have been small conflicts, but definitely there was far more stability during the Ottoman Empire, and likewise during the post WWII period, during Arab unity under the pan-Bathist movement. By war, I mean real war not small low scale conflict. Multi-state war that draws the entire middle east into conflict not simply that involving two opposing states over a border conflict. This is not a traditional border conflict. It is a control conflict that relates to global politics rather than old wars that were based upon issues of resource control or control of specific populations near border areas. There is no compromise available.

Also note it is "Moses" not "mosses" just a tip on that one, not to be patronizing.



> Should Turkey move into the role of an aggressor


For someone being critical of me for my meagre knowledge of the middle east you don't seem to be aware Turkey already has been acting as an aggressor.

In fact there really hasn't been much real wars. Even the 7 day war was only 7 days.. oh sorry 6 days war, at the 7th day there was rest.

Iraq was a foreign invasion, so was Afghanistan. These were isolated conflicts though. Really afghanistan is not really the midle east.

there hasn't been large scale war at all, ever in the middle east, except isolated conflicts like the Iran-Iraq war.. almost nothing of the "large type"

Iraq didn't even really put up much of a fight when the US coalition invaded either, hardly counts as a war. They had troops marching up the main highway within days. It was a damn short conventional conflict.

I don't think you understand what I mean by "war" I mean WAR.. like large scale conventional force combat with thousands and thousands of dead with the potential for escalation to nuclear, biological or chemical conflict


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

RT is now saying shelled forces were assad's,....

https://www.rt.com/news/332380-turkey-shells-northern-syria/


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

I really need to get some of what you are on. Could you in any way figure out that this conflict began when (Hebrew "son or deliverer" Moses) Yewah decreed that every man, woman, child, and creature of the earth be put to the sword as the chosen people moved into the promised land. You are about to receive the answer from those that were not the chosen people that lived in the promised land, and you are unable to perceive the enormity of the biggest War in all of Mankind? Aye Hosier, fill another pint and do your ostrich impersonation. You are 100% correct, we have a different view of WAR. I spent 4 decades in the middle of them, you can't conceive of anything less than your personal extermination being a WAR. 

I don't think you have any personal experience to compile your definition of "WAR", nor any idea of the scale to which a religious war shall escalate into. This isn't about natural resources or monetary gain, this is a Battle to the Death between ideological concepts. Have you any clue how violent the death of an ideology is???????? Would you care to tell me where all the deities have gone once thier followers have been exterminated?


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

M118LR said:


> I really need to get some of what you are on. Could you in any way figure out that this conflict began when (Hebrew "son or deliverer" Moses) Yewah decreed that every man, woman, child, and creature of the earth be put to the sword as the chosen people moved into the promised land. You are about to receive the answer from those that were not the chosen people that lived in the promised land, and you are unable to perceive the enormity of the biggest War in all of Mankind? Aye Hosier, fill another pint and do your ostrich impersonation. You are 100% correct, we have a different view of WAR. I spent 4 decades in the middle of them, you can't conceive of anything less than your personal extermination being a WAR.
> 
> I don't think you have any personal experience to compile your definition of "WAR", nor any idea of the scale to which a religious war shall escalate into. This isn't about natural resources or monetary gain, this is a Battle to the Death between ideological concepts. Have you any clue how violent the death of an ideology is???????? Would you care to tell me where all the deities have gone once thier followers have been exterminated?


My apologies I'm not a religious fundamentalist, and tend to be guided by reason.

Hmm, I think this may be a classic example of someone who is "inside the box" and can't see the big picture.

I understand what you are saying but unfortunately a religious fundamentalist view is not holistic. Also Israel doesn't have anything directly to do with this conflict, infact it is keeping its head relatively low.

There is far more to the world than Judeo-Islamic worldviews. It doesn't tell the whole story, sorry.

Frankly I have a lot of religion in me, but I can't really get any sense from what you are writing sorry. Keep trying.

May I ask when you learned English and what your cultural background is, it may help me in better understanding you.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

You are not making sense can you expand and give context to


> Doesn't matter what you think of what owns you.


I really don't understand this, the statement makes no sense.



> We have an ongoing argument to observe, that it isn't ever about anything but money to the players vs "it's a religious conflict".


If it was about money, no one would ever fight but the poor. If it was about religion, no one would ever fight but those whose religion isn't accepted.

Binary realities don't exist in real life. Arguments like money or religion, just are immature prospects.



> If it really were a religious one I would think arabs would be gone right now instead of retard pawns.


Arab isn't a religion, it is a culture, sorry.

I don't follow your narrative.

Wars and occupations are about freedom and who controls it.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Might I inquire into your conceptual depth of Wahhabi Islam? Would you mind defining what an infidel is in the Islamic World (Religion) ? Would you consider explaining what other religion, other than Islam shall exist upon the face of the earth at the completion of this tiny little insignificant War? OH, Answers 1950. American. You couldn't,haven't, and wouldn't have given of yourself to share any of the experiences that would allow you to begin to conceive of, understand, more or less emulate the lifestyle I have lived. We are not talking fundamentalism, you lack the ability to conceptualize beyond Black & White. The world is full of grey, perhaps you should experience some of it prior to publicizing non-prepossessing, self-serving, narrow-minded, prophetic opinions. Think I understand you pretty well Will2/


----------



## keith9365 (Apr 23, 2014)

I have 100 roaches in my pantry. If they should so happen to turn on each other and start killing each other off, there will be less roaches for me to stomp as they run out into my kitchen.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

> Might I inquire into your conceptual depth of Wahhabi Islam?


Poll an Imam or Saudi Royal on that not me.



> Would you mind defining what an infidel is in the Islamic World (Religion) ?


Ask a practicing Muslim, asking me what other people think is not a proactive question. You should ask how I would define it as I am not about to make a definition for the Islamic world. I can pull up a dictionary definition such as Oxford for you though. You did ask for a denotive meaning though, not connotative, unfortunately, I am not sure what Islamic dictionary to draw the word from. An Islamic authority should answer on that one, not me if I am speaking for another community.



> Would you consider explaining what other religion, other than Islam shall exist upon the face of the earth at the completion of this tiny little insignificant War


Its a little early to provide my opinion on that, it is unformed, should the conflict escalate. I could probably predict who would win at a game of blackjack moreso than answering that question at the moment. I would probably hedge on Hinduism.



> you lack the ability to conceptualize beyond Back & White.


You will have to expand on that as again, I cannot understand what you are saying. It just appears as poorly crafted rhetoric and ad hominem without a basis of position. Really bad argumentation.



> perhaps you should experience some of it prior to publicizing non-prepossessing, self-serving, narrow-minded, prophetic opinions.


At this point I have to ask, what the hell you are talking about.



> Think I understand you pretty well Will2/


I am having great difficulty following anything you have said. It really seems like you did not learn English natively. So to say you are an American born in 1950 your speech seems very odd.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

I do believe that there are enough English speaking people to understand when the uneducated and inexperienced are attempting to circumvent realism. You should give realism a try Will2, it's the difficult alternative to drug abuse.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

keith9365 said:


> I have 100 roaches in my pantry. If they should so happen to turn on each other and start killing each other off, there will be less roaches for me to stomp as they run out into my kitchen.


But what will you eat when war breaks out?


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

neonoah said:


> Duh. Guess squirrel -
> 
> (As your Dr I mus advise you against bringing up discussions of "what we're gonna eat?" in the shelter after the boom. Avoid that.)


A Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas reference! Denton is impressed!


----------



## jro1 (Mar 3, 2014)

Prepared One said:


> I have always said WWIII would start in the middle east. To many players involved and to much firepower. One ship, one plane, one wrong target, one misinterpreted action. Wars have started for a lot less. Saber rattling, political realignment, troop movements, reinforcing positions ( Europe ), small limited engagements. A lot to keep an eye on. Funny, the boob in the White House said just last month all was well.


That idiot also mentioned that we are living in the most peaceful time in history...he also said he is a Christian (rolls eyes)


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

M118LR said:


> I do believe that there are enough English speaking people to understand when the uneducated and inexperienced are attempting to circumvent realism. You should give realism a try Will2, it's the difficult alternative to drug abuse.


Ok, thanks for helping me better understand what you are trying to communicate. Clearly I am not your audience. If you don't intend to help me understand what you are trying to say, kindly do not direct your words toward me.

In the event you are insinuating that I am a drug user, again, your attacks are not welcome, and frankly incredibly rude. That wasn't very nice of you to state that I am a drug user, when in fact I use no drugs, and do not even smoke. I rarely drink. Inclining I use illegal narcotics is an attack on my character, and frankly, you should not be blatantly spreading false information about people, it is absolutely reprehensible.

Likewise as far as being realistic, I am not sure what you are inclining is not realistic about my views, which again, I have no idea what you are referring to.

I am an applied languages student as well as a certified English instructor. I have communicated with many many non-native learners, and your speech highly parallels awkward structures that are common in non-native speakers. Just saying. If you arn't foreign I would suspect brain damage or faulty formation, just sayin'.

Instead of focusing on me why don't you contribute to the thread by commenting on the situation presented instead of being an annoyance.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

I am stunned that Syria has not smashed ISIS. I am not sure if this war will stop, it may escalate and keep going.
I can tell you that Russia is in it for the long haul, Assad is an ally of theirs. None of us know where this will end.
But ISIS wants it to become an atomic war, they are demonic.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

Well the truce is suppose to start tommorrow, lets see if Turkey stops shelling the YPG. I am pretty damn sure Russia will continue to bomb Al-Nusra and Isis and their affiliates. Take Azaz for instance, the "oppositions" and Al-Nusra have a power sharing agreement. Where these powersharing agreements exist both Al-Nusra and their partners, the opposition will likely be subject to bombing by Russia, which will be used to fuel evidence Russia is not following the truce terms. Turkey again will say it is just attacking terrorists in Syria, even though it is IN Syria and doesn't have permission of the Syrian government. Oh, and those terrorist Kurds are now working with the Syrian government and the Russians are equating some units advancing as the Syrian governments forces/allies. Meanwhile Turkey is maintaining selfdefence by saying that they are shelling (for the past two days) in response to being fired on, which so far I havn't see evidence of. They are demanding that 1. Syrians do not stay in their airbase near Azaz and 2. Kurds YPG do not operate west of the Euphrates, otherwise they will continue to attack, and possibly invade "to attack ISIS with Syria" Doesn't really make sense though at first sight, I am sure there must be some logic why Saudi Arabia and Turkey would attack the strongest Wahabi Sunni force, ISIS in Syria??? 

It will be interesting to see if it is observed tomorrow. Odd as both Turkey/Saudi Arabia and Russia seem to be saying each other is breaking it and both are saying in the terms of framing of the others they will not stop what they are doing. Meanwhile the US is saying everyone just stop, the US clearly doesn't want to be dragged into another major midddle east conflict on other states terms.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Will2 said:


> Likewise as far as being realistic, I am not sure what you are inclining is not realistic about my views, which again, I have no idea what you are referring to.
> 
> I am an applied languages student as well as a certified English instructor. I have communicated with many many non-native learners, and your speech highly parallels awkward structures that are common in non-native speakers. Just saying. If you arn't foreign I would suspect brain damage or faulty formation, just sayin'.
> .


M.Ad.Ed. Only a French Colony would certify you as an English instructor? Perhaps a little time spent on the actual battleground would open your eyes to the concept of realism. You should stop creating your self serving alliances Turkey/Saudi Arabia/Russia/Syria etc.. and conceive that all have only their vested interests at stake. As far as the nonsensical, misspelled, run on, gibberish spouted in post #33; Child Please!!


----------



## keith9365 (Apr 23, 2014)

MisterMills357 said:


> I am stunned that Syria has not smashed ISIS. I am not sure if this war will stop, it may escalate and keep going.
> I can tell you that Russia is in it for the long haul, Assad is an ally of theirs. None of us know where this will end.
> But ISIS wants it to become an atomic war, they are demonic.


 Syria is a Mediterranean naval base just as Crimea is a Black Sea naval facility for Russia. Plain and simple."He who commands the sea has command of everything".THEMISTOCLES


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

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

Thus we touch upon the beginnings of Russia's reasons to be involved in the conflict. Perhaps the ever decreasing price of oil (Mainstay of the Russian Economy) spearheaded by:

Saudi Arabia's oil strategy tears OPEC apart - Jan. 15, 2016

Saudi Arabia which has a religious connection (if not direct support) to those creating the ISIS Caliphate.

Now we add in the Turkey/Kurdish problem and Saudi Arabia can both embolden and provide direct support to those growing the ISIS Caliphate (not a good time to be Kurdish) and strike a blow against an economic oil rival (Russia), while having the Power of NATO (and Saudi Arabia's long ally America) to shield thier own interests.

So Turkey gets to end the Kurdish problem. Saudi Arabia gets to aid it's Muslim Brothers and embroil an economic rival draining further monetary resources. Is there any wonder why Russia has come to Assad's aid? Least we forget that America has become an Oil Exporting Country, so any further expenditure of America's resources could be a benefit to Saudi Arabia? Pitting NATO against Russia should be a win win for countries not intertwined in either of the Superpower Packs.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

M118LR said:


> M.Ad.Ed. Only a French Colony would certify you as an English instructor? Perhaps a little time spent on the actual battleground would open your eyes to the concept of realism. You should stop creating your self serving alliances Turkey/Saudi Arabia/Russia/Syria etc.. and conceive that all have only their vested interests at stake. As far as the nonsensical, misspelled, run on, gibberish spouted in post #33; Child Please!!


You make no sense. Kindly stop directing communications toward me. I cannot view your words as sound, or cohesive. I am not engaged in formal writing on web forums, it is not a formal format. However, I think comprehensibility is important. I do not get comprehension or cohesiveness from your communications.

You don't seem to have a knowledge of credentials in English instruction however a Master's of Education, is a recognized qualification for teaching most everywhere in the world, sorry, you don't seem to understand a Masters of Education is a higher ranking qualification than a Bachelor's of Education, however, I simply don't understand how that got into this discussion. It is like you are just taking random misinformation and inserting it into a totally different topic. It is plainly nonsensical. Can you keep on topic or just stop communicating at all, it is just asinine conduct.

By all means address the topic, but kindly stop directing words toward me, they are disturbing me.

I also think that this issue is NOT simply a conflict over the Port of Tartus. There are far more issues at play and far more groups than just the Russians and NATO.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Will2 said:


> You make no sense. Kindly stop directing communications toward me. I cannot view your words as sound, or cohesive. I am not engaged in formal writing on web forums, it is not a formal format. However, I think comprehensibility is important. I do not get comprehension or cohesiveness from your communications.
> 
> You don't seem to have a knowledge of credentials in English instruction however a Master's of Education, is a recognized qualification for teaching most everywhere in the world, sorry, you don't seem to understand a Masters of Education is a higher ranking qualification than a Bachelor's of Education, however, I simply don't understand how that got into this discussion. It is like you are just taking random misinformation and inserting it into a totally different topic. It is plainly nonsensical. Can you keep on topic or just stop communicating at all, it is just asinine conduct.
> 
> ...


Are you talking to me?

Perhaps you should start by not disturbing me.

Conflicts are normally waged over Eco-Political differences, so perhaps we shall now need to include Religious beliefs as part of the Political Structure. With the current rampant wholesale destruction and profiteering of all cultural references or objects other than those of Muhammad, the Middle East is once again becoming embroiled in a religious uprising of biblical proportions. This has the possibility to reach further than any of the Empire Building (Religious conversion of all indigenous people) inhumanities that mankind has witnessed/executed so far. JMHO


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

So yesteray and today there are reported escalations

One report said 5000 opposition fighters crossed from turkey to Syria
Another report says 500 fighters entered syria from turkey
another said 200 fighters entered from turkey

and now this one by RT saying that Turks have entered from Turkey into Syria in Vehicles, the second such convoy, the other convoy was stated as opposition fighters.

https://www.rt.com/news/332924-turkish-vehicles-cross-syria/

The US also appears to be communicating with Russia in an effort to stop Russia from bombing its special forces, by letting russia know the general area they are in.


----------



## 1skrewsloose (Jun 3, 2013)

I didn't read all the posts, but, would wish folks would quit from using wikipedia, a site that allows editing of "truth", and snopes as the end all in what is true and just.
Oh, I forgot, I read it on the internet, it must be true!! If you can't come up with more reliable info than that I feel sorry for you. Sorry to go of topic, but posting B.S. does no one any good. my .02.


----------



## jro1 (Mar 3, 2014)

1skrewsloose said:


> I didn't read all the posts, but, would wish folks would quit from using wikipedia, a site that allows editing of "truth", and snopes as the end all in what is true and just.
> Oh, I forgot, I read it on the internet, it must be true!! If you can't come up with more reliable info than that I feel sorry for you. Sorry to go of topic, but posting B.S. does no one any good. my .02.


Unless it's duffel blog.com, now that rite there is funny s#!t!

Appears it is Turkey that will be responsible for dragging NATO into WWIII! It was going to happen sooner or later I suppose, now wasn't it?!?!


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

1skrewsloose said:


> I didn't read all the posts, but, would wish folks would quit from using wikipedia, a site that allows editing of "truth", and snopes as the end all in what is true and just.
> Oh, I forgot, I read it on the internet, it must be true!! If you can't come up with more reliable info than that I feel sorry for you. Sorry to go of topic, but posting B.S. does no one any good. my .02.


If you can't be bothered by reading the posts of what others have said, please refrain from bothering the rest of US with your silly expectations. JMHO.


----------



## jro1 (Mar 3, 2014)

This is all I could dig up! I don't think turkey has any troops in Syria as of yet!

Kurds warn Turkey of ?big war? with Russia if invades Syria


----------



## Trisell (Feb 18, 2016)

It would seem that Israel is no longer keeping its head down.

http://app.debka.com/n/article/2523...rian-army-outposts-on-the-Damascus-Daraa-road

I am interested to see how the Saudi Arabian citizenry handles any attack obstensibly by the royal family on ISIS. The Saudi's current are a radical population that is mainly subdued by the large amounts of oil money that is handed out by the royal family. As the level of fanatasism increases, would an attack on Isis by the Royal family be seen as an attack on them as well. Could that lead to the deposition of the royal family? And the catastrophic growth of both ISIS as well as the refuge problems? Not to mention that at that point. ISIS would have control over Mecca. Which could lead to the escalation of the entire Middle East at war over that site if it's felt that open access to it could possibly be denied.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

Trisell said:


> It would seem that Israel is no longer keeping its head down.
> 
> http://app.debka.com/n/article/2523...rian-army-outposts-on-the-Damascus-Daraa-road
> 
> I am interested to see how the Saudi Arabian citizenry handles any attack obstensibly by the royal family on ISIS. The Saudi's current are a radical population that is mainly subdued by the large amounts of oil money that is handed out by the royal family. As the level of fanatasism increases, would an attack on Isis by the Royal family be seen as an attack on them as well. Could that lead to the deposition of the royal family? And the catastrophic growth of both ISIS as well as the refuge problems? Not to mention that at that point. ISIS would have control over Mecca. Which could lead to the escalation of the entire Middle East at war over that site if it's felt that open access to it could possibly be denied.


This post doesn't make much sense logistically, as the Saudi Royal family is more or less the administration of Saudi Arabia, and it is very large.

While maybe one such attack might succeed there is a long line of successors, and at the very least it might cause a disruption but it would likely create a very very strong response by Saudi Arabia against ISIS if it claimed responsibility, farm more than a squadron of fighter bombers and a division of special forces.

I found this quote from your link funny though



> This is not surprising. When the Jordanian Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Mashal Al-Zaben was sent on a similar errand to Moscow a few days ago, he was given the runaround, told that, since the Syrian chief of staff happened to be in the Russian capital "by chance," and since he is in charge of military operations in the border region, why not talk to him?


----------



## Trisell (Feb 18, 2016)

My post was not about a single attack or assassination by ISIS against the Saudi royal family. But a revolution by the Saudi citizenry overthrowing the current regime.


----------



## 1skrewsloose (Jun 3, 2013)

M118LR said:


> If you can't be bothered by reading the posts of what others have said, please refrain from bothering the rest of US with your silly expectations. JMHO.


Sorry you got your butt hurt.


----------



## Targetshooter (Dec 4, 2015)

We need to worry about what goes on here in the US ,, not what's going on in the far east ,, let them blow them selves to hell ,, we have a big problem here with Obamazz and the Muslims he is importing and the laws he is breaking ,, If we look after us first we will be stronger to take on the far east ,, if we jump in the band wagon in the far east it leaves the door open into the US wider..


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

As long as it is Syria, . . . Lebanon, . . . Iraq, . . . Iran, . . . Russia, . . . Turkey and some other local ********* and communists are busting each other's chops for oil, oil rights, religion, or just for breeding rights in Baghdad, . . . it is a zero big deal, . . . not an iota of concern to the civilized world, . . . unless of course they want to test some of their newer war materials out.

Unfortunately, . . . less than 300 miles from all this war-going-on, . . . is Israel, . . . and all can dismiss what they want to, . . . Israel IS the key to all of what is going on in this region.

There are none of the other mentioned players that would not give their eye teeth to see Israel become a full fledged nation of Palestine, . . . flying some version of a ******** flag, . . . owing allegiance to Mecca and Medina.

That is the end play, . . . the end game, . . . and all of this other skirmishing is only leading up to the invasion of Israel by the "King of the North", . . . whomever that turns out to be when it happens. 

Presently, . . . most people believe Russia will assume that mantle, . . . the fact that they are knee deep in today's conflict lends credence to that theory, . . . 

When it happens, . . . the King of the North will swoop down along the Med, . . . through Israel, . . . and will stop only when they have fully occupied Israel and Egypt, . . . with the possibility of Libya and Ethiopia (as well as the Sudan).

Will2 mentions that he doesn't believe this is a war, . . . and the only question I need to ask him is "Have you ever had a helmet on, rifle in your hand, and been shot at?" If not, you have no comprehension of war, . . . and I couldn't care less if you have enough degrees that you could paper a basketball court with the diplomas, . . . you have no comprehension of what war is all about. 

Those who have endured war, . . . understand it, . . . those who have not, . . . will never understand it.

This IS A WAR, . . . people are dying, . . . people are killing, . . . and being killed. And it is not a self defense situation such as a robbery at Walmart. 

And it is only going to get worse.

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

dwight55 said:


> less than 300 miles from all this war-going-on, . . . is Israel, . . . and all can dismiss what they want to, . . . Israel IS the key to all of what is going on in this region.


I was listening before bed, fell asleep to it, to an Israeli Jew's Mechegena take on what has been happening, particularly with the 350000 strong troop exercise saudi arabia is doing over the next two weeks, it also involves 2500 aircraft.








> When it happens, . . . the King of the North will swoop down along the Med, . . . through Israel, . . . and will stop only when they have fully occupied Israel and Egypt, . . . with the possibility of Libya and Ethiopia (as well as the Sudan).


Well that is a mighty high order.



> Will2 mentions that he doesn't believe this is a war, . . . and the only question I need to ask him is "Have you ever had a helmet on, rifle in your hand, and been shot at?" If not, you have no comprehension of war, . . .


Tell that to a pilot, or someone in a tank, or someone on a ship. Infantry bias much.

Note the less with half a million dead Syrians, it is definitely a civil war, but it is not a large scale world war, as of yet, just clarifying. It is still very internal, or at worst regional, but my point was it could get much much worse.

As if Saudi Arabia Enters, Russia may be compelled, as is explained in the video. If Turkey goes in, NATO is surely in TOW, Iran may also be compelled. Iraq, for what it is worth have said they would enter against Saudi Arabia if Saudi Arabia invaded Iraq. China may be compelled to get involved in a global scale conflict but perhaps not.

Anyway, even with Saudi Arabia and Turkey and Russia alone, this would likely be the largest war since WWII.


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Will2, could you expound upon that largest War since WWII. There was quite a coalition during the first Gulf War.



1skrewsloose said:


> Sorry you got your butt hurt.


Perhaps you might consider how many other members you decided to disrespect, your concerns about what and why I reference mean little to me. Don't worry, no butt hurt other than failing to consider the thoughts and postings of all the other members.


----------



## 1skrewsloose (Jun 3, 2013)

M118LR said:


> Will2, could you expound upon that largest War since WWII. There was quite a coalition during the first Gulf War.
> 
> Perhaps you might consider how many other members you decided to disrespect, your concerns about what and why I reference mean little to me. Don't worry, no butt hurt other than failing to consider the thoughts and postings of all the other members.


Pound sand!, skippy!!


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

1skrewsloose said:


> Pound sand!, skippy!!


Bet everyone else likes your flippancy cheese eater, meet you at the corner of route 53 & 63 at the Dinner Bell Restaurant if you continue to propagate this discord.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

M118LR said:


> Will2, could you expound upon that largest War since WWII. There was quite a coalition during the first Gulf War.


No offense but I asked for you not to communicate with me directly. I have the sense you have the same poor senses regarding persistent communications after someone has made the request not to be disturbed as a few other rude members on the forum.

Your first gulf war comments made me chuckle. It was like a week of the Syrian war in terms of involvement. You clearly have no grasp of what is going on or what is going to go on as a result of the ongoing situation in Syria and Iraq. I suggest you do some research before posting back here with a position as you seem not too knowledgeable about the subject matter.

If I want you communicating with me, I'll directly communicate with you in the future, for the time being however kindly don't directly communicate with me, but by all means feel open to communicate with others in this thread or respond to what is said, just don't direct questions or comments to me personally. Mature discussion doesn't require people in the discussion to be referenced. Also I highly suggest you do some research before commenting in this thread, I seriously question if you are some 10 year old pretending to be someone else, you don't seem mature at all when you make comments like the first gulf war was the biggest war since WWII. I watched it on TV and it was more of a show than a war. (It was an operation, that was fairly one sided)

Not meant to be an attack on you, just kindly don't communicate with me for the time being. If I change my mind at some future date I will let you know.


----------



## SittingElf (Feb 9, 2016)

Will2 said:


> (@ M118LR)No offense but I asked for you not to communicate with me directly. I have the sense you have the same poor senses regarding persistent communications after someone has made the request not to be disturbed as a few other rude members on the forum.
> 
> If I want you communicating with me, I'll directly communicate with you in the future, for the time being however kindly don't directly communicate with me, but by all means feel open to communicate with others in this thread or respond to what is said, just don't direct questions or comments to me personally. Mature discussion doesn't require people in the discussion to be referenced. Also I highly suggest you do some research before commenting in this thread, I seriously question if you are some 10 year old pretending to be someone else, you don't seem mature at all when you make comments like the first gulf war was the biggest war since WWII. I watched it on TV and it was more of a show than a war. (It was an operation, that was fairly one sided)
> 
> Not meant to be an attack on you, just kindly don't communicate with me for the time being. If I change my mind at some future date I will let you know.


You're kidding, right??







You want to control WHO responds to your public posts on a public forum.....REALLY?? Good luck with THAT!








If you want to do that, then you should start your own blog or forum, where YOU control who can speak, and be able to moderate, delete, ignore, or ban commenters. You can't really expect everyone to agree with your posits. Get a backbone dude!


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

SittingElf said:


> You're kidding, right??
> View attachment 15024
> 
> You want to control WHO responds to your public posts on a public forum.....REALLY?? Good luck with THAT!


Well I also am requesting you don't communicate directly with me either.

I have no issue with people commenting on posts, in fact, I encourage, it; however, I am requesting certain rude, offensive or insulting posters refrain from directing communications to me, or making comments about me. There is a difference bewteen commenting on a subject and turning a subject into a commentator. Ad hominem does not belong in respectful discussion.



> If you want to do that, then you should start your own blog or forum, where YOU control who can speak, and be able to moderate, delete, ignore, or ban commenters. You can't really expect everyone to agree with your posits. Get a backbone dude!


show some respect, if someone doesn't want to have communications from someone in real life, and they ask that person to stop, they should stop. Communicating with someone who doesn't want your communications is abusive, harassment, and an intentional annoyance. Learn some respect.

Maybe it flies in Nigeria to be a nuisance to people, however, when someone asks someone else not to spam them in mature western civilization those communications stop. My suggestion is you take a hint and realize your communications directed are unwanted. I don't like your view, and I am asking you not to communicate with me because I don't like you and you annoy me. You want to post on the forum do so, I am not a mod, but I have full right to ask someone not to communicate with me directly. I'm not saying don't post, just don't post to me, and don't post about me.

If you can't follow that you are disrespectful and I want even less to do with you, you are rude, offensive and an annoyance because you can't oblige a request not to disturb someone with ongoing direct and abusive communications that are unwanted spam.

If you don't think people should not be disturbed on request then you need to learn some manners. If you don't like this just stop communicating with me or about me, and I will have no reason to engage you about your communications with me.

It is you who is the problem, not me. Live and let live, but don't bug people.

You find it funny, I don't. I find you to be annoying. Its not about you posting on this forum, it is about you talking about me, and talking to me. If I want to engage you I will engage you and we can chat. If you want to come up and start sending unwanted communications and lying about me and my behaviour you can shut up, because you are engaging in civil violations of speech.

AGAIN , why not try sticking to the topic instead of again derailing the discussion and turning it into one about me.

I have no desire to discuss me here. I don't come to this forum to talk about me.

Just try persistently speaking to someone who has asked you not communicate with them on the street and see what happens. I have a right to my privacy and to defend my character from falselight and defamatory attacks. You are incredibly rude, and your position is incredibly rude. You are the problem. Take the hint and stop communicating with me or about me, it is unwanted.

I have no kind words for you. I have a very low opinion of you and your standards of good behaviour. If you can't be respectful, then frankly you suck. I have better things to do with my time than respond to people who can't oblige a simple request not to communicate with me or about me. This is not a blanket request, but it definitely applies to people I specifically ask this of, because I know those people are either sockpuppets, or people that have standards of communication I consider criminal.

Hopefully this is the last time. I have asked you not to communicate with me or about me. If we cannot interact on that basis then you are the problem. I must be clear if you want to comment on something I have said, comment on the subject, I am not the subject. If I am the subject YOU should not comment.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

Just saw a globalsecurity.ca post that Russia has warned turkey that if it attacks its assets in Syria, airbase etc.. then it will take it as grouds to use tactical nukes to prevent Russian assets from being overrun.


----------



## SittingElf (Feb 9, 2016)

Disclaimer: This is not a post communicating directly in any fashion with "He who's name cannot be mentioned". It is a generic post for the purview of any and all EXCEPT "He who's name cannot be mentioned".

Cheers!


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

Will2 said:


> Well I also am requesting you don't communicate directly with me either.
> 
> I have no issue with people commenting on posts, in fact, I encourage, it; however, I am requesting certain rude, offensive or insulting posters refrain from directing communications to me, or making comments about me. There is a difference bewteen commenting on a subject and turning a subject into a commentator. Ad hominem does not belong in respectful discussion.
> 
> ...


This is to damn funny " He who cannot be mentioned ".:laughhard:


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

Will2 said:


> Just saw a globalsecurity.ca post that Russia has warned turkey that if it attacks its assets in Syria, airbase etc.. then it will take it as grouds to use tactical nukes to prevent Russian assets from being overrun.


anyway, some commentators are starting to seriously question Turkey's position. It seems likely the conflict will last atleast another year.

It seems unlikely to most that a war involving a nato state and russia could occur

http://www.neweasterneurope.eu/arti...e-going-to-be-a-war-between-russia-and-turkey

Some nato members have been saying Turkey cannot depend on Nato if it decides to start a war.

I've been following "South Front" which use to put out daily updates, they are getting less common now.

Here is another update.

http://en.abna24.com/service/middle-east-west-asia/archive/2016/02/22/736329/story.html


----------



## M118LR (Sep 19, 2015)

Will2 said:


> No offense but I asked for you not to communicate with me directly. I have the sense you have the same poor senses regarding persistent communications after someone has made the request not to be disturbed as a few other rude members on the forum.
> 
> Your first gulf war comments made me chuckle. It was like a week of the Syrian war in terms of involvement. You clearly have no grasp of what is going on or what is going to go on as a result of the ongoing situation in Syria and Iraq. I suggest you do some research before posting back here with a position as you seem not too knowledgeable about the subject matter.
> 
> ...


When you do change your mind and decide to to talk with someone that has experience instead of Disney World (Small World Outlook), don't expect me to provide the perspective of REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE you so sadly lack. Should, or God forbid you need to communicate with someone that has survived the experiences that you dote upon, don't expect me to take into consideration your PPPP. (Did you need me to spell that out) When you can have a conversation that includes those that have done things along with conceptual dreamers, perhaps then it would be worthwhile for others to listen to your concepts. Until then useless dribble is just useless dribble and I hope it makes you feel omnipotent. Bye.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

It is becoming increasingly unlikely that Turkey will do anything. Russia briefed Iran about the US cease fire arrangement yesterday, with Minister of Defence of Russia seeing his counterpart in Iran in an unannounced trip.

It seems Saudi Arabia has increased military spending and is doing operations for Yemen (Ironically with the 1/3 million strong Northern Thunder being said to be an operation relating to their conflict in Yemen), while Turkey has decided to increase security and has escalated its war against the Kurds with some 18 PKK soldiers killed today.


----------

